PTP Digest 2003/10/30-A = CONTENTS

* Seattle: Huge Road Warrior victory as court zaps transit tax
   KOMO-TV News - Seattle October 30, 2003

* Honolulu ed: Gov's transit projects are 'good start'
   Honolulu Star-Bulletin Wednesday, October 29, 2003

* Honolulu: GOP creates 'gridlock' on transit tax plan
   Honolulu Star-Bulletin  2003/10/29

* Houston: Anti-rail group sued for refusing to name contributors
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 29, 2003

* Houston letters:  Admire, despise anti-rail pols
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 30, 2003

* Sacramento: LRT, BRT, traffic lanes & a neighborhood
   Sacramento Bee  Tuesday, October 28, 2003

* Orange County businesses in path of CenterLine LRT
   Costa Mesa Daily Pilot Wednesday, October 29, 2003



=PTP==============================================

http://www.komotv.com/news/printstory.asp?id=28040

KOMO-TV News - Seattle
October 30, 2003

Eyman Wins: $30 License Tab Measure Upheld

By KOMO Staff & News Services


OLYMPIA - The Washington Supreme Court on Thursday upheld Tim Eyman's
initiative 776, last year's measure that abolished local taxes and fees on vehicle
registration, stripping Sound Transit of one of its largest sources of money.

in a 6-3 decision, the court overturned a King County Superior Court judge who
had ruled that I-776 violated the constitution by addressing more than one
subject and impairing Sound Transit's ability to pay off its bondholders.

The decision is a rare victory in the courts for Eyman, the anti-tax activist who
has seen two of his most popular initiatives struck down by the high court.

"Two things happened that made the difference," Eyman said. "We hired better
lawyers and the majority of the court moved closer to the voters."

The court's majority rejected the notion that the initiative's requirement that
voters approve changes to transportation plans and programs was a second
subject. In her opinion, Justice Susan Owens noted that the single-subject rule
was intended to prevent the practice of "logrolling," or passing two unpopular
laws by creating an impromptu coalition of their supporters.

"The constitutional prohibition against legislative vote swapping plainly applies to
the passage of two or more 'unrelated laws' - not to the passage of one law that
contains policy expressions indisputably devoid of any legal effect," Owens
wrote.

i-776 passed last November with 51 percent of the vote. In a bid to guarantee
everyone in the state $30 car tabs, it eliminated a $15 road improvement fee in
four counties - King, Pierce, Snohomish and Douglas - and killed Sound Transit's
motor vehicle tax, which is collected in parts of King, Snohomish and Pierce
counties.

After the court's ruling, tabs fell to nearly $30 everywhere in the state except
Seattle, where new taxes for the proposed monorail system, approved by voters
at the same election as I-776, drive the price up.

Sound Transit, which Eyman attacked for changing the light-rail projects voters
approved when they created the agency, stands to take a $699 million hit, the
agency estimated last year. The tax levied $60 on a car worth $20,000.

Losing the $15 fee will cost King County and its cities an estimated $218 million
over 10 years. Pierce and Snohomish County would each lose about $80 million,
and Douglas County would lose $4.4 million, according to estimates by the state
Office of Financial Management.

Sound Transit had no immediate comment on the ruling, but scheduled an
afternoon news conference to discuss it.

Joining Owens in the majority were Chief Justice Gerry Alexander and Justices
Barbara Madsen, Charles Johnson, Richard Sanders, and Mary Fairhurst.
Justices Faith ireland, Bobbe Bridge and Tom Chambers dissented, agreeing
with Sound Transit and the other local government agencies that battled the
initiative.

"First, it limits the amount state and local governments may charge for motor
vehicle licensing," Chambers wrote. "Second, it calls for ... counties to halt
development of a voter-approved light rail transit system until the funding
mechanisms are revisited and reapproved. These subjects are not rationally
related, and therefore the initiative violates our constitution."

Of the four Eyman-sponsored anti-tax ballot measures voters approved in the
last four years, two - 1999's initiative 695 and initiative 722 in 2000 - were struck
down by the courts, although the I-695's abolition of the statewide car-tab tax
was quickly adopted by the Legislature.

But for 2001's initiative 747, which limited the growth of property taxes, he
sought the help of Jim Johnson, a prominent appellate attorney, and the initiative
drew no challenge. Johnson also worked on I-776.

The case is Pierce County et al v State of Washington et all, No. 73607-3.



=PTP============================================

http://starbulletin.com/2003/10/29/editorial/index.html

Honolulu Star-Bulletin -- http://starbulletin.com
Wednesday, October 29, 2003

Editorials


Gov's transit projects are a good start on a long road


THE ISSUE

The governor is proposing to build a light-rail system and an elevated highway to
ease Oahu's traffic congestion.


IT APPEARS that Governor Lingle has cleared a major hurdle in solving Oahu's
snarling traffic problems by getting key federal, state and city officials to sign on
to her plans to build a light-rail transit system and an elevated highway. She will
need all her political skills to keep them on track and for the more difficult task of
winning the public's approval for the tax increases she says will be necessary to
pay for the projects.

Although the federal government typically foots as much as 80 percent of the bill
for such transportation ventures -- and there are no assurances it will do so for
this project -- the balance will have to come from residents' pockets. With the
total cost for both proposals estimated at $2.8 billion, Hawaii's portion still
represents a sizable chunk of money.

Whatever the case, the rail and road plans have a long way to travel. The
governor can anticipate resistance from legislators, who may be reluctant to
raise taxes, and from neighbor island residents, who may not see tangible
benefits of a transit system on Oahu.

Lingle and her task force unveiled their plan for an elevated light-rail system that
eventually would span 22 miles from Kapolei to Iwilei along Oahu's southern
coastline, following Farrington, Kamehameha and Nimitz highways. An elevated,
two-lane highway above Nimitz would be used initially to funnel traffic east
toward downtown in the mornings and west in the afternoons. The structure,
running from the Keehi interchange to Pacific Street, would be incorporated later
as part of the rail line. Officials hope construction of the Nimitz project will be
complete in six years and the rail system in 15 years.

Lingle properly recognizes that her rail proposal doesn't negate the need for the
city's bus system and Mayor Harris' Bus Rapid Transit project, which is poised
for start-up next year. Rail transit will not reach valleys and ridges or
communities beyond Iwilei and Kapolei, where drivers face traffic jams as vexing
as those in West and Central Oahu.

What may be the most challenging obstacle the governor will face is convincing
taxpayers in other counties that what may appear to be costly projects to help
Oahu residents will benefit them as well.

To raise money, Lingle's task force is considering increases in a variety of taxes,
some administered by the counties and others by the state. It may be difficult to
persuade Kauai or Maui residents that paying a higher state excise tax will
benefit them somehow. The governor will need to find a way to show how better
traffic movement in Honolulu will bolster the economic well-being of the whole
state and why neighbor island taxpayers have just as much of a stake in Oahu's
transit future as city residents.



=PTP==========================================

http://starbulletin.com/2003/10/29/news/indez.html

Honolulu Star-Bulletin
2003/10/29

Lingle's tax hike idea hits gridlock

Senate Republicans do not want to raise taxes to pay for
a mass transit system


By Richard Borreca and Crystal Kua
rborreca@starbulletin.com ckua@starbulletin.com


Gov. Linda Lingle's call for a tax increase to pay for an ambitious new mass
transit system has failed to generate support.

On Monday, Lingle and city and state officials announced proposed solutions to
Oahu's traffic congestion that include a $2.6 billion rail transit system and a $200
million elevated road above Nimitz Highway. The preliminary plan won
immediate bipartisan praise, but legislative and other leaders were not
embracing Lingle's call for higher taxes.

Senate Republicans voted yesterday to take a caucus position against the
increase.

"I support the concept and I applaud the governor for bringing people together,
but I can not support a tax increase," said Sen. Fred Hemmings, GOP Senate
leader.

Hemmings said he had told Lingle on Monday that he could not support a tax
increase.

Hawaii Kai Republican Sen. Sam Slom went further, saying he didn't like either
the plan or the tax increase.

"I am absolutely opposed to tax increases and opposed to the fixed rail concept.
... I am disappointed that the governor is going to abridge her most vaunted no-
tax pledge," Slom said.

The Republican House leader, Rep. Galen Fox, said he also had taken a pledge
not to vote for a tax increase, so he was considering various aspects of this tax
proposal.

if the tax was imposed only for the construction of the rail line, Fox said, it could
be considered a user fee, which wasn't part of the no-new-taxes pledge. "But it is
quite possible that the tax proposal would be too high for me to support," he
added.

Democrats also hailed the plan, which is scheduled to be completed by 2018,
but backed away from support of a tax increase.

House Speaker Calvin Say, a Democrat, said the transit line is needed and 10
years ago the Legislature approved a plan to permit the Honolulu City Council to
raise the excise tax in Honolulu by half a percent to fund a transit line. While that
plan passed the Legislature, it failed by one vote in the Council.

Say added that while he "would be open" to a tax increase, it would depend upon
Lingle asking for the increase and then the position of his fellow Democrats.

"If she doesn't come up with a proposal, we would have nothing to support," Say
said.

Two key critics of the original plan, Hawaii Tax Foundation Director Lowell
Kalapa and Cliff Slater, a leader of the Alliance for Traffic improvement, said the
new transit plan would not work.

"She needs a reality check," Kalapa said of Lingle. "The people who voted her
into office were the most disgruntled about paying so much for government."

The transit plan would be fine, Kalapa added, if the state and county would pay
for it by limiting spending and reallocating other resources.

Slater, who favors building a reversible two-lane highway from Waikele to
downtown, said the logic of building any transit system is flawed.

"People use roads. You have to convince people to use mass transit," Slater
said.

A new mayor will be at the helm of the city's transit decisions after next year.

Mayoral candidate Duke Bainum, the former City Council transportation
chairman, said the light rail system tied into the city bus system is similar to what
he has been supporting.

But Bainum said that talk about raising taxes is premature. He said it is better to
wait for the overall cost of the project and learn how much federal funding can be
obtained before deciding on taxes.

"I'd be concerned about any tax increase. With that said, I am aware that federal
dollars will be difficult to obtain," Bainum said. "If a tax increase were required, i
would certainly closely scrutinize any tax increase proposal and make absolutely
sure the increase would result in a meaningful improvement in Oahu's traffic
problems."

Opponent Mufi Hannemann said whether the state raises taxes or floats bonds
to pay for a rail system, the taxpayer is going to get hit in the pocketbook.

"Our options are very limited given the dire financial straits the next mayor is
going to inherit. Therefore this may be our only option but I've always said that
tax increases should be looked upon as a last option," Hannemann said.

City Councilman Charles Djou, a Republican, said he doesn't like raising taxes
either but sees a difference with the rail system being proposed.

"The taxpayers will see a tangible product at the very end. It's a little bit different.
It doesn't mean though, however, that I'm enthusiastic about raising taxes."

Djou said that voters should be asked for their opinion. "Perhaps what needs to
happen is send this to the voters and have the voters actually decide it on a
ballot as to whether or not they like the idea of raising taxes," he said.

Councilman Donovan Dela Cruz, who is expected to become the new Council
chairman tomorrow, said even though he represents parts of Central Oahu, the
North Shore and Windward Oahu -- areas not served by the rail line -- the project
will be good for his constituents as well.

"The less people we have on the road coming from Kapolei and Ewa, that means
less congestion for people coming from the North Shore and Central Oahu."

But Dela Cruz said more information is needed before deciding on a tax hike.



=PTP=============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 29, 2003

Anti-rail group sued for refusing to name contributors

By ALAN BERNSTEIN


Joined by former Houston Mayor Fred Hofheinz, a group of political activists who
favor Metro's light rail expansion plan sued an anti-rail group Wednesday for
refusing to reveal its campaign contributors.

The group, Pro-Rail Houston, is seeking damages of twice the amount of the
money collected and spent by Texans for True Mobility.

TTM, which is criticizing Metro's plan in ads funded by its nonprofit corporation
designed to guarantee anonymity for its donors, called the lawsuit a groundless
and misguided political stunt.

Metro's transit plan is on the ballot in Tuesday's election.

TTM's refusal to disclose its contributors is also the subject of a complaint by the
public advocacy group Common Cause Texas to the Texas Ethics Commission
and a criminal investigation by Harris County prosecutors in response to a
Houston Chronicle complaint.

But Wednesday's lawsuit and the other actions apparently can't force TTM to
reveal anything before the election.

Admitting as much, Pro-Rail Houston said it went to court Wednesday instead to
promote the rail plan and put TTM and its contributors on notice that eventually
they may have to pay damages for breaking state election law. Pro-Rail Houston
alleged at a news conference that TTM has formed a "secret society" that
undermines the political process by hiding the identity of its backers.

"That loophole is really having an effect on this election," Hofheinz said at the
downtown Civil Courthouse, as one block away Metro showed off the rail cars
scheduled to run on Main Street starting Jan. 1.

As he has argued for weeks, TTM lawyer Andy Taylor said a few hours later that
the corporation is exempt from state election laws that require candidates and
political committees to disclose the names of their contributors and the amount
of money they have donated.

TTM is protecting the First Amendment, which guarantees free speech, by not
voluntarily disclosing donors, Taylor said. Even disclosing the number of donors
and the total amount given, without making public the names, would erode
TTM's constitutional stand, he added.

Pro-Rail Houston is "trying to undermine the true (anti-Metro) message of our
fine organization," Taylor said.

He pointed out that the NAACP and other groups have used carefully structured
campaign organizations to run political ads without revealing their donors.

Pro-Rail Houston includes Harris County Democratic Party Chairman Gerald
Birnberg, former Democratic judicial candidate Terry O'Rourke and former
Republican judicial candidate Rod Gorman.

The Common Cause Texas complaint alleges that TTM at least had to disclose
its campaign expenses under state election law. The state ethics commission
usually takes months or years to investigate complaints and can fine violators.

Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal said the results of his staff's
investigation won't be revealed until after the election because he doesn't want to
affect the election. Criminal violation of state election law carries a maximum fine
of $500.

Pro-Rail Houston said that under the law that controls this kind of case it cannot
ask a judge to immediately order TTM to publicly name its donors.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2190958



=PTP================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 30, 2003

Viewpoints

A fine public servant

Two Democratic congressmen from the Houston area have seized on this
dispute over cost estimates to impugn Rep. Culberson's effectiveness and
integrity. Houstonians should see this exactly for what it is: an ill-informed,
partisan attack on a respected member of Congress.

As a member of the Transportation, Treasury and independent Agencies
Appropriations Subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives, Culberson
has worked diligently to ensure that Metro reports its financial status accurately
and completely, that its estimates for future grants are thorough and that the
Houston area gets its money's worth from Metro. Culberson has asked the
questions that others would not and conducted the research that others left
undone.

His hard work on my subcommittee and, in particular, his meticulous oversight of
Houston's federal transit dollars, has been admirable. He should be commended
as a fine public servant who is looking out for the best interests of his
constituents.

Rep. Ernest Istook, R- Okla., chairman, Subcommittee on Transportation,
Treasury and independent Agencies Appropriations




Plan lacking public input

[U.S. Rep. John] Culberson, R-Houston, and [Harris County Judge Robert]
Eckels claim that the Houston Galveston Area Council's "100 percent Solution"
(that they worked on) is better than the "Metro Solutions" plan and called it
"hastily approved" (see Culberson's Oct. 22 Outlook article, "Choose the '100%
Solution' over Metro's").

However, the Metropolitan Transit Authority has been working on this program
and aiming toward this vote for six or seven years.

During that time (at the behest of [U.S. Rep. Tom] DeLay, R-Sugar Land) Metro
hired the best traffic consultants to study the alternatives for the Houston region,
held countless public meetings seeking input from the public, formed a plan and
revised it to reflect the suggestions offered in additional meetings with the public
and finally asked the public to vote.

That does not sound like it was "hastily approved" to me.

Where were these two during the last several years while these public meetings
were being held?

Where was the HGAC during this time?

Why weren't these ideas brought up for discussion and consideration by the
public then?

Now they would have us believe that they have the best plan -- which they trot
out within days of the election so that Metro has no time to respond.

Their plan has not been through the rigorous public hearing process for
comments.

Their plan for a commuter rail along existing rail corridors was studied during the
[Mayor Bob] Lanier administration and rejected as "too expensive."

Their plan was created by politicians, not professional traffic-engineering
consultants.

Now tell me: Which of these plans was "hastily" thrown together?

D.J. Marsh, Houston


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2190605



=PTP================================================

http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/7683182p-8623073c.html

Sacramento Bee
Tuesday, October 28, 2003

RT rejects proposal to raze homes

Residents air complaints about the Truxel Road blueprint that would need space
for light rail.

By Tony Bizjak -- Bee Staff Writer


With pleas and angry complaints from South Natomas residents ringing in their
ears, Sacramento Regional Transit board members agreed Monday that they will
no longer consider a plan for light rail that would have required knocking down 81
residences on Truxel Road.

But several other less obtrusive alignments along Truxel Road remain in play --
and remain the agency's most likely route for a light rail or "bus rapid transit"
service in the coming decade from downtown to Sacramento international
Airport.

The board dropped the option that would have widened Truxel Road to give light
rail two exclusive tracks, separated from vehicle traffic. That plan would have
forced the purchase and razing of all structures on the street's east flank from
Garden Highway to San Juan Road.

RT officials continue to consider Truxel Road routes in which one or two light-rail
tracks would run in vehicle traffic lanes, as is the case on 12th Street in
downtown. RT's project manager David Melko said that leaves open the
possibility that RT could take some land at some spots, potentially up to 12 feet,
next to Truxel Road.

The decision did not soothe at least one resident whose house could be torn
down.

"They aren't going to change their minds?" asked a skeptical Dea Karnegas.

She was among a group arguing that the line should run along interstate 5, away
from their neighborhood.

RT officials have been studying an I-5 alignment, but those officials released
data Monday they say show they probably can't get necessary federal funding for
the project unless light rail goes on Truxel Road, where costs would be lower and
ridership higher.

The data also show that "bus rapid transit," essentially a modern version of an
express bus, would be cheaper than light rail on either alignment.

RT's Melko is scheduled to provide an analysis at the Nov. 10 board meeting
about the merits of light rail versus bus rapid transit.

RT officials then will have an afternoon workshop and an evening public
workshop Nov. 20 in the downtown convention center about project alternatives.

The RT board has scheduled a final public hearing about the options at a Dec. 8
meeting, and then is expected to vote Dec. 15 on which direction to go.

Truxel Road area residents have asked in recent weeks for RT to postpone that
decision, saying they didn't hear about the project until recently. But board
members declined to grant a postponement after staff recited a list of the public
meetings about the project going back two years.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About the Writer
---------------------------

The Bee's Tony Bizjak can be reached at (916) 321-1059 or
tbizjak@sacbee.com



=PTP==========================================

Costa Mesa businesses in path of CenterLine LRT


[BATN]

Costa Mesa Daily Pilot
Wednesday, October 29, 2003

Businesses unhappy with proposed route

Owners of stores in the path of potential CenterLine rail say they
are shocked to find themselves under the gun.

By Deirdre Newman
Daily Pilot


COSTA MESA -- Avo Kilicarslan invested his lifetime savings in his
restaurant, Avo's Bistro.


Like a classic Mediterranean restaurant, the bistro's ambience is
enhanced by the soft gurgling of water nearby -- in this case, a
lake with a fountain in the back of the center at 580 Anton Blvd.


So Kilicarslan said he was shocked to find out that his idyllic
environment could disappear if the county chooses Costa Mesa's
preferred route for the CenterLine light rail system.


it would be in the way.


The county is considering four different routes for the light rail
to get from the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center to John
Wayne Airport. It will decide on one in early December.


The city prefers a route with a small underground portion, running
along Avenue of the Arts. If this route is approved, the only
property in the right-of-way is the Lakes Pavilion, where Avo's
Bistro sits. Three other businesses would also be affected.


Kilicarslan's shock soon turned to skepticism as he contemplated his
life's work being forced out.


"I don't believe it will happen," Kilicarslan said, motioning toward
the lake and the palm trees surrounding it. "I don't understand what
they're doing. I don't think they would destroy this beauty."


The owner of the property could not be reached for comment.


in July, the county approved a shortened CenterLine project at a
cost of less than $1 billion. In early October, city officials
finally persuaded the county to consider putting a portion of the
light-rail system underground where it runs near South Coast Plaza.
The major Costa Mesa players in the project -- C.J. Segerstrom &
Sons, the Orange County Performing Arts Center and the major
landowners in the north Costa Mesa area -- pressed for an
underground route so the light-rail system won't interfere with
existing developments.


The compromise worked out among the business owners, city leaders
and the county involves about 1,100 feet of the line to go under
Avenue of the Arts at a cost of about $50 million with no
underground stations.


The property at 580 Anton is in the only one in the right-of-way in
Costa Mesa because the county chose the option that had the least
effect on private property, said Orange County Transportation
Authority spokesman Michael Litschi.


in addition to Avo's Bistro, the L-shaped center houses Ocean Park
Cleaners, Digital Hearing Technology, the Corner Office and two
vacant storefronts.


On Oct. 14, the authority started the process of hiring a right-of-
way consulting firm that would eventually acquire property once the
final route has been chosen. The authority chose to act at that time
because it wanted to keep the entire project on schedule, Litschi
said.


The authority's board of directors can't vote on the final route
until December because the environmental report is still going
through a public comment period. There will be a public hearing on
Nov. 24 for property owners, business owners and others to comment
on the project.


After the board chooses a preferred route in December, the
environmental report will be studied again, with public comment, and
has to be approved by the federal government.


Acquiring property couldn't start until the federal government signs
off on the project and the earliest acquisition would begin is
August, 2004, Litschi said. It will be decided down the line whether
the county or individual cities will be responsible for acquiring
right-of-way property. If property owners don't voluntarily sell
their property, the county could take the land at a price it deems
worthy through eminent domain.


Owners and regulars of the Corner Office -- a sports bar especially
popular with the NFL crowd -- also expressed shock at the prospect
of being sacrificed for CenterLine.


Scott Hodge, one of three owners of the bar, said he first was
excited when he heard the light rail would come down Anton Boulevard
because it would have been great exposure for the bar.


Upon learning of the new underground route and its repercussions,
Hodge questioned the need for the light-rail system.


"Do we even really need it?" Hodge asked. "Does anyone take the
train? it would be nice if [they did]. It would relieve congestion.
But I don't see thousands of people getting on the train."


Patrons of the bar gearing up for Monday Night Football expressed
indignation at the prospect of their favorite watering hole drying
up.


"I think it would be very disappointing," said Jim Flanagan, a local
business owner who has been meeting friends at the bar for the past
eight years. "I think these guys provide a great place for business
people like me to meet. It's very high-class."


The authority is holding off on conducting a major outreach campaign
with potentially affected property owners until the final route is
chosen, Litschi said.



Deirdre Newman covers Costa Mesa and may be reached at (949) 574-
4221 or by e-mail at deirdre.newman@latimes.com.








PTP Digest 2003/10/29-A = CONTENTS

* Charlotte: US Senate OKs LRT funding
   Charlotte Business Journal October 27, 2003

* Honolulu: Rail back in play 'because it makes sense'
   Honolulu Star-Bulletin October 26, 2003

* China's maglev may be world's 1st, but perhaps its last
   Baltimore Sun Monday, October 27, 2003

* Houston op-ed: Metro rail needed because freeways fall short
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 29, 2003

* Amtrak op-ed: US needs 'healthy' rail system
   Los Angeles Times Sunday, October 26, 2003

* Amtrak: Modest funding bill passes Senate, faces House struggle
   New York Times October 27, 2003


=PTP==============================================

http://charlotte.bizjournals.com/charlotte/stories/2003/10/27/daily6.html

Charlotte Business Journal
October 27, 2003


U.S. Senate OKs light-rail funding

The U.S. Senate has approved $950 million for transportation projects in North
Carolina, including $18 million for construction of Charlotte's south corridor light-
rail project.

Expected to become operational in 2006, the 10-mile rail line will connect uptown
and interstate 485 north of Pineville.

The city will also receive $5 million for a Charlotte Area Transit System bus-
maintenance and operations center.

Of the $950 million in federal funds, $850 million is earmarked for N.C. highway
projects.

The appropriations, announced by the office of U.S. Sen. John Edwards, are part
of a $45 billion funding bill that will now go to conference commitee.



=PTP===========================================

http://starbulletin.com/2003/10/26/editorial/indexeditorials.html

Honolulu Star-Bulletin
October 26, 2003

Fixed-rail transit revives because it makes sense

Editorial

THE ISSUE

The City Council's Transportation Committee has approved a resolution calling
for fixed-rail mass transit between downtown and Kapolei.


FIXED-RAIL mass transit, rejected in 1982 and again a decade later, appears to
be back on track, with the city and state administrations and the City Council
unified in support of the idea. The Council's Transportation Committee has
unanimously supported a resolution backing a "work plan" for a rail line reaching
from Kapolei to downtown. All levels of government should get fully on board and
go forward with the plan.

The City Council rejected then-Mayor Frank Fasi's proposal for a rapid-transit
plan 21 years ago and a scaled-down light-rail version stretching from Leeward
Community College to downtown in 1992. That plan was halted by a 5-4 vote on
a tax increase to finance its construction. While Mayor Harris' Bus Rapid Transit
plan, using high-capacity buses, is likely to be an improvement over the current
traffic crawl, Honolulu is particularly suited for such a rail system because of its
linear coastal configuration.

State Transportation Director Rodney Haraga told the Council he will present the
governor's task force on transportation a mass transit plan that includes rail, a
bus system and road improvements. Haraga said city and state cooperation is
needed to ensure federal funding, which could account for half or more of the
cost.

Cheryl Soon, the city transportation services director, warily endorsed the
Council resolution with the admonition, "If you really don't intend to go all the way
through with it, don't appropriate a penny; just stop right now."

Council Chairman Gary Okino, who introduced the resolution, said it would
authorize a "work plan" consisting of "a quick, brief, preliminary assessment that
will pull together all our previous studies, update all the information, give us
different financing options as to how we're going to do this." As Okino
appreciates, no more studies are needed.

Okino says the key to his proposal is putting the rail line at a different level from
vehicle traffic to avoid snarls. Lingle has proposed an elevated highway between
downtown and Kapolei, and Haraga says that will be included in a plan he was to
present to the task force. Those two visions don't mesh.

Other refinements will be needed to develop a plan that satisfies both the Harris
and Lingle administrations, along with the City Council. Because of all the
previous studies conducted during the past three decades, that process will not
take as long as one might expect.

Taking Soon's warning to heart, Council members should make sure their
commitment is strong and then approve the resolution. Cooperation is needed at
all levels to make a rapid-transit system a reality in Honolulu.



=PTP===========================================

[BATN]

Baltimore Sun
Monday, October 27, 2003


China's commercial maglev train to be world's 1st, perhaps its last

$1.2 billion project offers lessons for Md. proposal


By Gady A. Epstein
Sun Foreign Staff


SHANGHAi, China -- Every weekend, an unusual train glides out from a
nondescript station, carrying its passengers at remarkable speeds
along tracks high above the farms and factories east of downtown
Shanghai. With a cruising speed of nearly 270 miles per hour, it is
the fastest passenger train in the world, but what makes the train
truly extraordinary is what it lacks underneath its alloy chassis:
wheels.


At a cost exceeding $1.2 billion, the Shanghai Transrapid line might
be the most expensive 19-mile train route on the planet. By early
next year it is due to become the world's first high-speed magnetic
levitation or "maglev" train in full commercial operation.


The big question now is if it will also be the last -- for the
foreseeable future, at least. A maglev train linking Baltimore and
Washington, a concept pushed by Baltimore for more than 11 years, is
one of three leading candidates for the first maglev line in the
United States. But the project's future depends on $950 million in
federal funds, on the support of the state, which would also have to
provide money, and on whether private financiers believe the train
can operate profitably.


The only working example anyone can consider when making decisions is
the Shanghai Transrapid, which carried then-Chinese Premier Zhu
Rongji and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder on its maiden voyage
Dec. 31, less than two years after construction began. So far, the
train is a popular tourist attraction, but the signals about its
future are mixed.


The maglev's German designers had hoped to win a contract to build a
line from Beijing to Shanghai, turning a 14-hour trip into a commute
of three to four hours. But the China Railway Ministry appears
inclined to consider proposals only from manufacturers of slower,
wheeled trains, as critics question the economic and practical wisdom
of entrusting a critical rail corridor to what they view as an
unproven, expensive technology.


"The Australians considered the maglev between Sydney and Kampala.
[BATN: That would be quite a line, linking Australia with Uganda.
In  contrast, Canberra lies only 280 km from Sydney.] They gave it
up," said Shen Zhijie, who retired in April as director of the
High-Speed Track Office of the China Railway Ministry. "The Koreans
also considered the maglev between Seoul and Pusan, and they also
gave it up.


"The Beijing-Shanghai railway has to be for serious transportation.
It's not for exhibition or tourism, and you cannot just argue
theoretically."


China has a passion for railways and an appetite for grandiose public
projects. The government is paying for the world's highest-altitude
railroad (to Tibet), the world's largest dam and the world's third
manned space program. With the Shanghai Transrapid, the country has
the fastest passenger train. During daylight hours on weekends, the
Shanghai Transrapid shuttles passengers between Shanghai's suburban
airport and the city's urban outskirts, where Shanghai mass transit
carries passengers the rest of the way into town.


An experiment


But for now the 19-mile, eight-minute trip remains mostly an
experiment -- for the technology, the engineers who built it and the
enthusiasts watching from far away, including Baltimore and
Washington.


Above all, it is an experiment for Beijing's decision-makers, who
appear to be leaning toward more conventional high-speed trains, like
ones already in use in Japan and Europe, for the new Beijing-Shanghai
line. That has to be troubling for the maglev's passionate adherents:
if the maglev train can't succeed here, where the government can
spend whatever it wants, and where more than a billion passengers a
year take trains, then where can it succeed?


The Shanghai Transrapid begins each trip smoothly, gliding on an
elevated track. On this particular weekday test run, a group of
electrical workers is being rewarded with a ride.


As the train accelerates, the speed and time are displayed on digital
screens at the front of each passenger car. The train reaches 100 mph
in little more than a minute, and about 175 mph after two minutes.


An air suspension system, backed up by a secondary system of springs,
keeps the train floating along without the bumps typical in wheeled
trains.


But in the third minute, as the train approaches 250 mph, the
passenger cars begin to wobble.


At the 3:21 mark, the train reaches the top cruising speed of almost
268 mph -- maglevs can go faster but not on this short route. The
train moves through the air at such high speed that it creates a low
whistling that could become unnerving on a longer trip. The engineers
behind the maglev may have figured out how to get rid of friction
with the tracks below, but there's no way to eliminate friction with
the air.


The safety issue


The train's rates of acceleration and deceleration are carefully
controlled, which means that people can stand and walk in the aisle
at any point during the trip. Still, at these speeds, some passengers
may become conscious of the lack of safety belts in a way they never
would on typical trains.


The lack of safety belts was intentional -- the idea was that the
train should look and feel as safe as any other.


"It doesn't need safety belts. There won't be a car crash, there
won't be sudden braking and it will not turn upside down," said a
high-ranking official with Shanghai Maglev Transportation Development
Co. Ltd, who spoke on condition his name not be used. "it's not like
the airplane or the car."


That theory may be tested on the maglev, which travels at speeds
faster than some airplanes. At the trip's midpoint, a second maglev
train rushed by on a parallel track at the same speed, producing a
roar of air friction. On this day, the engineers were making sure
that two maglevs could pass by each other safely at top speed.


Passengers have to adjust to the fact that the vehicle has no wheels
and is not touching anything but air. They must remain confident the
train won't suddenly spin out of control as it tilts and turns at 225
mph.


The train's German builders -- a consortium of Siemens AG and
ThyssenKrupp AG called Transrapid international -- have been working
to solve a series of safety and comfort issues. China's state news
media have given few details about the technical problems, but they
include concerns about rubber insulation overheating along the
electrically charged track.


The Shanghai maglev official said the glitches were of no
concern: "The damage caused by heat is no threat to safety. It's just
like the clothing is old, but you can still wear it," he said. "There
are also a lot of other problems, but none of them is a problem for
the safety of operation.


"it's just like you buy a new television for your family and the
channels are not tuned in perfectly. You make some adjustments, and
it will be fine."


How it works


The maglev works thanks to a combination of magnets and electrical
charges. Holding the train aloft is interaction between magnetic
coils in the track and electromagnets on the underside of the train.


Electrical current flows through the track's coils, creating a
magnetic field that pulls the train along as it floats less than a
half-inch above the track. When the train is at rest, it may kneel
down on the "guideway" to unload passengers.


in theory, the train can reach high speeds without requiring costly
track maintenance. The friction created by wheels rolling on tracks
has been eliminated.


Drawbacks


Unfortunately, the train's drawbacks are equally obvious: cost of
construction and uncertainty about new technology. China expects to
spend close to $16 billion to build a conventional high-speed Beijing-
Shanghai line. The price for maglev construction might be
substantially higher. Also, the maglev can operate only on its own
tracks, unable to switch to the tens of thousands of miles of
conventional tracks.


Another fundamental issue is the maglev's cost for passengers, though
that may be a problem for other high-speed options as well. Per-
capita income in China is less than $700 a year, but a round-trip
ticket on the 19-mile Shanghai maglev costs $28. That is more than
migrant workers and students pay for a one-way ticket for the 1,270-
mile train trip between Beijing and Chengdu, the capital of Sichuan
province.


"The maglev train is certainly not for migrant workers," said the
Shanghai maglev official. "it's for businessmen and tourists."


That would be an issue in Maryland, despite Americans' vastly higher
incomes. Maglev detractors in Maryland question a consultant's
estimates that more than 30,000 people a day would pay a significant
premium for the Baltimore-to-Washington trip. A one-way ticket could
cost as much as $26, far more than the $7 charged by the much slower
MARC train.


'Better investment'


Supporters argue that the maglev is a better bet than other high-
speed options because it would have substantially lower operating
costs.


"They might spend less money building [conventional] high-speed rail,
but they will have a long-term higher cost because they will have a
higher operations and maintenance cost," said Phyllis Wilkins,
executive director of Maglev Maryland, which is funded through the
city's economic development arm, the Baltimore Development
Corp. "Maglev is a much better investment in the long run, and it's
not just me saying that. It's people who have done studies who are
saying that."


The potential appeal for China's well-to-do urban travelers may yet
be enough to persuade Beijing to build another short track, in time
for the 2008 Olympic Games, connecting Beijing's international
airport with the city center at a cost of $700 million.


But it should be worrisome to America's maglev advocates that for
longer routes, China remains hesitant to pursue the world's fastest
passenger train.



=PTP==================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 29, 2003

Viewpoints

Why Metro plan? Because freeways won't do

By J. SAM LOTT

FACT: The weekday traffic activity in Houston will essentially double over the
next 30 years, according to the Houston Galveston Area Council.

Most of the debate over the Metro Solutions plan has focused on the
comparisons of costs and forecasts of Metropolitan Transit Authority sales tax
receipts, federal grants and other revenues over the next 20 years. However, the
discussion of cost must go beyond the details of the Metro financial plan and
consider what price the entire metropolitan region will pay over the long term if
we delay again the start of a regional rail system. The real future of
transportation in Houston is best understood when we consider the limitations of
our freeways.

Houston has an excellent freeway and tollway system design of spokes radiating
out from the central business district with several loop expressways connecting
the spokes in concentric rings. However, the freeway system is ultimately limited
by the capacity constraints where freeways intersect other freeways. It is at these
critical points of the freeway interchanges that the system breaks down, and
massive congestion spreads through the network.

Despite the improvement plans and current construction projects for many
freeways within the network, the points of capacity constraint at each freeway
interchange cannot be eliminated. The engineering fact is that the physical
constraints imposed by the superstructure result in the greatest limitations to the
number of lanes that can pass through the interchange.

Once our freeway system's capacity is built out over the next 10 years, there is
no more significant capacity for roadway vehicles that we can add through the
critical points of constraint at the interchanges. The combination of the freeway
system, tollway/HOV lanes (often called managed lanes) and the
highway/arterial street system alone cannot fully address the capacity needs of a
thriving metropolis such as Houston without a comprehensive rail system also
being included.

in fact, even the Houston Galveston Area Council's "100 Percent Solution" plan,
which is frequently referred to as a better alternative by outspoken rail
opponents, acknowledges this limitation, and actually calls for more transit
systems and facilities than Metro has put in its 2025 plan. High-capacity mass
transit is an essential component to a comprehensive transportation system. The
planned addition of a narrow-width transit right of way for high-capacity
throughput (i.e., the Metro system plan) along our current transportation system
of rings and spokes is essential to meeting the capacity demands of the not-so-
distant future.

Understanding that the freeway system is limited by the interchanges, what
stance should we take on the Metro Solutions plan?

We must start now. It takes 20 years of planning, design and construction before
a comprehensive mass transit system can be fully incorporated as an integral
part of the overall transportation network. We cannot afford to wait.

We must first build the core system in the center of the city. A central circulation
system at the heart of the transit network is the right foundation to build on. The
ultimate system will include radial high-capacity transit lines to the airports and
suburbs. However, we must establish the inner-circulation system first. The
proposed inner-city light-rail and bus components interconnect four major urban
business districts (i.e., downtown, the Texas Medical Center, Galleria/Post Oak
and Greenway Plaza). Metro's intent to build 22 miles of light rail as the next
phase of expansion creates an extremely effective core system by connecting
these major business centers, three of which are individually of a size and
density to rank with the top 15 downtown business districts in the country.

Twice before during the past 20 years Houston has come to the threshold of
starting this process to build a regional high-capacity mass transit system, and
both times the initiative has been knocked down by those espousing the
philosophy that we need to concentrate on the streets and freeways only, not
transit. Houston's congestion problems cannot be solved by any one element
alone. Only with a combination of transportation components such as freeways,
arterials and transit alternatives can Houston move forward to tackle congestion.

Lott is U.S. representative to the international Electrotechnical Commission and
is part of its working group that's writing the safety standards for automated
urban guideway transit. He also is senior vice president of Kimley-Horn and
Associates Inc. In Houston.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2190647



=PTP===============================================

[BATN]

Comment: Demand plan for healthy US rail system


Los Angeles Times
Sunday, October 26, 2003

Comment

Arthur Frommer: On a Budget

Railing against the system

it was 2 a.m. when my train pulled out of Fargo, N.D., to begin the
36-hour trip to New York City. I was angry and dejected because a
minor medical emergency had prevented me from making the trip home
in three hours by air. But the journey taught me an important lesson
about U.S. rail travel.


I had arrived in Fargo the previous morning to give a speech. As the
plane landed, I felt sharp pains in my right ear, then pressure and
a reduced ability to hear. Scared, I rushed to the local emergency
room and was told that an infection had caused a buildup of fluid
behind the middle ear that would take several days of medication to
dispel. Meanwhile, I could not take the next day's 2 p.m. flight
home, because the air pressure of takeoff and landing might burst
the weakened eardrum and cause permanent hearing loss.


My alternatives? Returning to the East Coast by bus would take three
days of stop-and-go travel, something I would not do. Nor did I wish
to endure days of solitary driving in a rental car, with overnights
in motels. So no big deal, I thought; I'd return by Amtrak. The saga
began.


I quickly found that across the entire northern swath of the United
States -- from Seattle to Fargo to Minneapolis to Chicago -- there
is only one daily train, the Empire Builder, in each direction. One
slow choo-choo that departs the Pacific Northwest to cross the
prairie states and arrive in Fargo at 2 a.m before proceeding for
14 more hours to Minneapolis and Chicago.


After my morning speech, I had to wait 14 hours before starting out
on a 36-hour marathon.


I crossed half the United States at speeds averaging 60 mph,
compared with the 150 mph that a great many long-distance trains in
Europe, Japan and China routinely travel. I had no choice in
scheduling the trip. I waited for a middle-of-the-night departure,
then spent two nights on the train. I'm still seething.


Our congressional representatives routinely appropriate billions
each year for federal highway construction and maintenance, but dig
in their heels against funding Amtrak realistically. Some members of
Congress favor terminating our national rail system in all areas of
the country other than along the Washington, D.C.-New York-Boston
corridor. Funded in a grudging, last-minute, stopgap manner, Amtrak
stumbles along, unable to properly keep up its facilities and
services, let alone bring them to the state-of-the-art levels of
speed and efficiency achieved in other prosperous industrial
countries.


it is time to make this a major political issue. If you agree, write
to your congressional representative and demand an adequate, long-
range plan for a healthy U.S. rail system.



=PTP================================================

New York Times
October 27, 2003

Senate Passes Amtrak Subsidy, but a More Frugal House Awaits

By MATTHEW L. WALD

WASHINGTON, Oct. 26 — The Senate has approved a $1.34 billion subsidy for
Amtrak for the fiscal year that began on Oct. 1, setting up a conflict with the
House, which approved a $900 million bill and has been eager for structural
changes at the railroad.

Amtrak had been seeking $1.8 billion, which it said it needed to return to a state
of good repair. The railroad president, David L. Gunn, said in a letter to senators
on Wednesday that the $1.34 billion "leaves us at great risk in terms of reliability"
but that Amtrak could continue operating with an appropriation of that size "and
hopefully not worsen the amount of deferred maintenance."

The Senate acted late Thursday. The two versions will go to a conference
committee, probably one that will consider several last-minute appropriations
bills, Congressional staff members said. That left some Amtrak supporters in
Congress in doubt over what level of influence they would have in the
conference.

The White House favors the $900 million subsidy, but Mr. Gunn insists that
number would force a shutdown next year.

The negotiators will also have to resolve some nonfinancial details in the bill. The
House favors a provision that would let another federal agency, the Surface
Transportation Board, step in to keep the Northeast Corridor open for commuter
operations and freight traffic if Amtrak were to shut down. Amtrak owns the
Northeast Corridor, the tracks from Washington through Penn Station in New
York to Boston.

The House negotiators may also push for a clause that would allow a single
Amtrak long-distance route to be contracted out to a private operator as an
experiment, a House aide said.

The White House favored giving states the power to decide which Amtrak routes
would continue, and after a transition period, giving them the financial liability as
well. But neither house favored that approach.







PTP Digest 2003/10/28-A = CONTENTS

* Houston op-ed: Dallas's rail success
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 27, 2003

 * Houston Metro debunks rail foe's 'cheaper' alternative
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 27, 2003

* Houston: Confusion, battle rage over rail finance facts
   Houston Chronicle  Oct. 28, 2003

* Houston: Questions grow over anti-rail 'foundation'
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 27, 2003

* Boston discovers highway widening attracts more cars
   Boston Globe Sunday, October 26, 2003

* Norfolk: After years & millions, maglev project can't get off ground
   The Virginian-Pilot Friday, October 24, 2003

* Detroit zaps trolleys, subs buses in $20 million road project
   Detroit News Friday, October 24, 2003

* Amtrak has more riders, but money problems remain
   MSNBC  July 18


=PTP===================================================

HoustonChronicle
Oct. 27, 2003

Viewpoints

Real truth about Dallas rail and its success

By MARVIN D. MONAGHAN

PUBLIC transportation observers in Dallas are bemused at the array of
criticisms, threats and dire predictions leveled at the light-rail construction project
in Houston. It's déjà vu all over again to those who vocally supported the Dallas
Area Rapid Transit, or DART, rail program and who beamed with satisfaction
when the rail line was completed and judged a success in all quarters while the
dissident factions faded into the woodwork never to be heard from again. The
same phenomenon will occur in Houston upon completion of the starter line.

Not only has light rail been a success in Dallas but in many cities in the United
States and around the world. It is the ideal solution for a city that has grown too
large for buses but cannot support heavy rail with fully dedicated subways and
elevated guideways. Reports that it is a failure in Dallas and that a cash-flow
crisis exists is simply not true. The one-cent sales tax has declined because of
the recession that has gripped the country, however, reductions in service and
temporary overall belt tightening are addressing the shortfall. The sales tax
mainly pays for around-the-clock service, which the public demands outside of
peak hours, when the fare box pays the costs of operation. Rail service has been
reduced from 15-minute intervals to 20 minutes in off-peak hours. Peak-hour
service remains at five- to 10-minute intervals. Little to no inconvenience has
resulted.

instead of referendums being defeated en mass as alleged, municipalities that
were not included in the original DART rail plan are clamoring to be admitted,
and arrangements are being made to accommodate them without detracting
from the tax investment of the cities that voted into the system in the beginning.
Denton County has already established a transportation authority of its own and
will partner with DART for service into Dallas via Carrollton as is done with Fort
Worth Transit. The only dissenting votes came from communities too small to
matter or located too far from the proposed rail alignment. This will give
convenient access to the two large universities in Denton for the thousands of
Dallas County students who now have to fight frustrating congestion on
interstate 35.

Several communities between Plano and McKinney are anxious to acquire rail
service and are investigating whether to establish a Collin County Authority or to
join DART.

The North Central Texas Council of Governments is actively promoting the
activation of the DART-owned Cotton Belt line to provide commuter rail from Fort
Worth into the north entrance to D/FW Airport. East Texans are looking to the
east end of the Cotton Belt for future commuter rail service to extend as far as
Greenville and perhaps beyond. Fort Worth has plans for commuter rail
southwesterly to Granbury and north to Denton.

Nowhere is there negativism remaining in the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex of the
character that clouds the issue in Houston, and this opposition will disappear
once the sleek, new Metro light-rail trains are rolled out and the public can
experience the smooth, comfortable, quiet ride that is in marked contrast to the
bumpy, rattling, noisy buses with their cramped interiors and narrow single
doorways. Each rail car has four double doors on each side eliminating a long
queue of riders at stops and has access to ample electrical power from the
overhead wire, which assures efficient air conditioning.

False impressions have been voiced implying that rail systems disadvantage
minorities and transit dependent riders. In Dallas, these people, most of whom
live in the southern sector where there are few jobs, are delighted that the slow,
plodding bus ride to the north side of the city where the jobs are has been
replaced by the fast 65 mph trains. For example, the peak hour travel time from
downtown Dallas to downtown Garland has been cut almost in half, and the
trains stop at a station near the industrial job sites on the way in. Four other
convenient stops are made.

One detractor accuses light-rail trains of being products of foreign design and
manufacture. Has he looked out the window to see where many of our
automobiles and trucks and virtually all buses come from? Foreign light-rail train
builders have assembly plants in the United States, the same as automobile
manufacturers. Our country was a leader in this field in years past and is
gradually regaining this position. DART's cars were built as shells in Japan and
fitted out in Dallas and Elmira, N.Y. An alleged disadvantage of being "tethered
to a sparking wire," mentioned by one critic, ignores the pollution-free operation
this makes possible. That is better than being tethered to an Arab oil well!

Transit train safety is unparalleled. In seven years of operation at DART, there
have been fewer than a half-dozen fatalities, and these have been due to
careless pedestrians or motorists who walked if front of trains or drove through
lowered gates. Buses have far more accidents. A recent one involved two rogues
who commandeered a bus and caused the driver to crash into a tree and a
garage injuring several passengers. The trains are under master control of a
dispatcher in a central office at all times, with radio communication and remote
lineside signaling to prevent accidents. Not all of DART's road crossings are
grade separated but are protected by gates and lights or traffic signals. A 3.5-
mile tunnel speeds the trains through near North Dallas.

Another false alarm is the rumor that the trains cannot operate in more than
three inches of water. Competent design by the right of way engineers will
ascertain that standing water will be eliminated by adequate drainage. Never has
there been an instance of a DART train being stopped by high water.

Metro has drawn criticism for owning its own headquarters building. So did DART
when they bought and renovated the former Foley's Department Store Building --
until they showed a 27 percent saving over renting. A transit agency cannot
afford to hire engineers and other staff full time just for periods when
construction is under way. DART maintains most of an entire floor of offices,
which is occupied by visiting engineers, eliminating much confusion and
unnecessary travel while achieving better coordination of planning.

Electrically propelled transportation is better positioned to cope with any
petroleum shortage that might occur. In the Texas grid, there are five possible
sources of electricity that may be called on for the purpose of powering the
trains.

it is irrelevant to discuss congestion and pollution in connection with public
transit. To make a dent in either, thousands of cars and trucks would have to be
removed from the roadways. What it will do is give commuters who live in the
corridors served by rail a pollution- and congestion-free ride to work every day
devoid of frustrating delays and accidents on the freeways. It is misleading to
state that only 1, 2 or 3 percent of a population uses transit. The usage must be
compared to the population in a specific corridor, which can run as high as 35
percent. With 70,000 riders a day using DART's light-rail and commuter trains, a
corresponding number of automobiles are obviously off the road.

Last but not least is the subject of image and the impression that a city leaves on
its visitors. Not many are impressed by hordes or swarming buses, and they can
seldom identify with where the buses go. When a bus is gone, it leaves no
tracks. A world-class city can do better. Rail is both a permanent and identifiable
fixture and an in-perpetuity investment for the community it serves. The
ambience it creates on a city street is not to be ignored. The highest real estate
values of their kind in the world are on a rail transit mall in Zurich, Switzerland!


Monaghan, of Garland, is a retired optometrist and served on the board of
directors of Dallas Area Rapid Transit from 1990-93 and 2002-02. He also
served on the North Central Task Force, which assisted in the design of the road
and rail alignments through North Dallas.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2183463



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 27, 2003

Eckels touts alternate commuter rail plan

Says system faster, cheaper than Metro's

By LUCAS WALL


Harris County can build a commuter rail system faster and cheaper than Metro's
light rail plan, Judge Robert Eckels said Monday, releasing a draft of a study for
the U.S. 290 and Texas 249 corridors.

Eckels and numerous other Republican leaders are urging voters to reject next
week's Metropolitan Transit Authority $7.5 billion expansion plan. It calls for
building $5.8 billion of rail during the next 22 years: 65 miles of light rail as well
as an eight-mile commuter line to Missouri City. Metro has no rail proposed to
Hempstead or Tomball by 2025.

"There is a lot of potential for commuter rail in this community," Eckels said at a
news conference at Houston TranStar. "We believe it's a viable alternative to
light rail."

Commissioner Steve Radack, who initiated the commuter rail review, is also
against Metro's plan. But he questioned the release of the study before its
completion.

"Waiting until something is done accurately is very prudent," said Radack, whose
precinct includes most of the U.S. 290 corridor. "I'm optimistic. I think it has a
tremendous amount of potential. But the study isn't complete yet, and I'm not
one of those people who likes to deal with fantasy or dreams."

Radack said it's unwise to present an unfinished study as an alternative to
Metro's transit-expansion referendum, which includes new bus routes, HOV
lanes and local roadwork.

Commuter rail utilizes heavy trains, such as those run by Amtrak, and runs at
high speeds on freight railroads with an exclusive right of way. Light rail utilizes
smaller trains and runs at slower speeds, often on tracks embedded in the street.

The final commuter rail report, which Commissioners Court requested July 29, is
due at the court's next meeting Nov. 4 -- the same day voters decide Metro's
transit-expansion plan.

Eckels said he expects the court will authorize a more detailed study looking at
other potential commuter rail corridors and moving ahead with plans on who
would pay for and operate the first two proposed lines.

"There are 165 miles or more of commuter line candidates in Harris County,"
Eckels said while standing behind a model of an East Coast commuter train.
One coach was modified with a sticker reading, "Harris County Express."

A countywide commuter rail network at $5 million per mile could cost less than
$1 billion, Eckels said, far cheaper than the $80-million-per-mile light rail system
Metro proposes. (Metro's cost-per-mile figure has been adjusted upward for
inflation; the Main Street line under construction costs $43 million per mile).

Metro supporters, however, questioned Eckels' numbers and dismissed the
notion that commuter rail alone is a solution to the region's traffic problems. They
point out a more detailed study of a commuter train to Fort Bend County puts the
cost at $14 million to $19 million per mile.

Paul Mabry, spokesman for Citizens for Public Transportation, called Eckels' pre-
election maneuver "an 11th-hour Hail Mary." CPT is the political action
committee campaigning for passage of the "Metro Solutions" plan.

"We want a complete system that does something about the traffic mess we're
into," Mabry said. "You start by addressing where the traffic is the greatest: down
in the urban area. It is not up in Prairie View."

Metro officials, while supporting the commuter rail concept, pointed out some
flaws in the county's study, including basing construction costs on having only
three stations per line, each with 150 parking spaces.

John Sedlak, a Metro vice president, said the transit authority's Park & Ride lots
along U.S. 290 accommodate about 5,000 commuter-bus riders daily. Sedlak
noted the county study lacks ridership and fare revenue forecasts.

"We would certainly see commuter rail as being complementary to the Metro
Solutions plan but not as an alternative to it," Sedlak said. "The light rail is very
specifically addressing the needs in congested corridors where there are high
densities of transit ridership."

Eckels has urged voters to turn down Metro Solutions and let the county come
back next year with a better rail proposal. He said commuter rail could be
operating by 2006, much more quickly than Metro's light rail expansion, the first
piece of which wouldn't start running until 2008.

Most important, Eckels said, is that the larger trains are a better solution to traffic
woes.

"Commuter rail is safer and faster, typically, than light rail because it runs in the
existing rail corridors separated from traffic so you're not mixing with the cars on
the road," Eckels said. "It runs where congestion is worse and can provide
alternates for relief on congested freeways."


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2183577




=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 28, 2003


Argument heats up on proposed Metro rail funding

By LUCAS WALL


Local members of Congress continued bickering Tuesday over whether Metro
has the money to pay for its $7.5 billion transit expansion plan that voters will
consider next week.

Both sides called news conferences to restate points previously made in the
battle over Metropolitan Transit Authority's federal grant projections. Rep. John
Culberson reiterated his concern that Metro will run out of money and be unable
to finish the projects it promises, while transit supporters said the plan is fiscally
sound and accused Culberson of playing with numbers to mislead voters.

Four weeks ago, Harris County Judge Robert Eckels, a light rail opponent,
released numbers provided by Culberson, R-Houston, purporting to show that
Metro overestimated how much federal grant money it can expect in the next six
years by more than $100 million.

After the Federal Transit Administration released a letter last week denying that it
had generated the supposed shortfall figure, Culberson asked the agency for a
clarification.

Tuesday, he got a response from Jennifer Dorn, federal transit administrator,
that states it's "essentially correct" to assume Metro has overestimated its future
grant money based on a Bush administration proposal.

That bill, pending in Congress, would slow the annual growth rate in transit funds
to 2 percent. The transit authority has assumed an 8 percent future annual
growth rate, arguing that Congress always increases the president's request.

Culberson, however, said the growth rate will go up only with a federal gas-tax
increase, which he and the president oppose.

"A week before the election, we still don't know how short Metro is on federal
revenue," Culberson said. "The letters I'm releasing today confirm that Metro has
overstated its federal revenue by at least $53 million and perhaps as much as
$124 million."

Culberson also handed out copies of a letter to the editor of the Houston
Chronicle sent by Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., who chairs the House
transportation appropriations subcommittee. Istook points out that his staff
provided Culberson with the Metro projections, but his letter did not cite the $53
million or $124 million figures Culberson mentioned Tuesday.

Those figures also weren't in Dorn's letter, which also states: "Until Congress
completes its work on multiyear surface transportation authorization legislation, it
is impossible to predict with certainty the future levels of formula or discretionary
funding."

Democrats and Metro executives pounced on that sentence at their afternoon
gathering outside City Hall, reiterating that it's premature for Culberson to
criticize Metro's projections when the transportation authorization is still before
Congress. Metro wants approval to build 73 miles of rail and other transit
projects.

in other Metro campaign news Tuesday:

· Common Cause of Texas filed a complaint with the state Ethics Commission
alleging Texans for True Mobility, the prominent anti-rail group, has violated
campaign finance laws by failing to disclose contributors.

The Harris County district attorney's office is reviewing a Chronicle complaint
alleging the same infraction. Texans for True Mobility says the allegations are
groundless, contending ads sponsored by its foundation are not political
advocacy and therefore not subject to disclosure.

· Environmental groups held a news conference in Hermann Park to argue that
light rail, powered by electricity, will help reduce auto emissions.



http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2188424





=PTP================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 27, 2003

Foundation clouds comparison of rail donors

By LUCAS WALL

The political action committee supporting Metro's Nov. 4 transit-expansion
referendum raised almost twice as much money in the past month as the
committee opposing the plan, campaign finance reports filed Monday show.

Anti-rail campaigners appear to have raised more money overall, however. But
it's difficult to truly compare the dollars being spent for and against the
Metropolitan Transit Authority proposition because Texans for True Mobility also
maintains a nonprofit education foundation that is not disclosing its donors and
expenditures.

TTM contends its advertising merely informs voters that Metro's plan is a bad
idea but does not advocate for voters to cast a "no" ballot. Numerous groups
have complained about the secrecy, and the Harris County district attorney's
office is reviewing a Houston Chronicle complaint alleging TTM is violating state
ethics laws.

Citizens for Public Transportation, the pro-rail committee, reported raising
$321,012 for the monthlong period ending Monday. Its total collections since
forming in December are $1.1 million.

TTM's political action committee reported raising $175,000 in the last month, its
first in existence. In an e-mail last week to prospective donors, TTM stated its
foundation arm had raised $1.4 million. That would put both TTM entities almost
a half-million dollars ahead of the pro-rail side.

CPT's contributions, ranging from $100 to $25,000, came from 70 businesses
and individuals. TTM's committee contributions, on the other hand, came from
only two of the group's members. Chairman Michael Stevens donated $155,000,
and treasurer Edd Hendee gave $20,000.

The pro-rail committee reported spending $722,838 in the past month. Almost
half of those expenditures, $311,794, went to Houston's three major television
stations for advertising. The anti-rail committee reported spending $170,283. The
bulk of its expenditures, $77,165, went for purchasing radio ads.

TTM's report reveals its political action committee borrowed $151,000 from the
foundation arm -- dollars donated anonymously -- to start purchasing advertising
earlier this month. Stevens then stepped in with the $155,000 donation Monday
to repay the loans. The committee's balance is listed as $4,717.

Chris Begala, TTM spokesman, declined again Monday to reveal who has
donated money to the foundation. He also refused to provide the number of
donors or confirm the total amount raised and spent.

CPT reported $248,469 in the bank. Its leader, Ed Wulfe, had harsh words for
TTM's continued secrecy.

"I am amazed, absolutely shocked," Wulfe said at finding out one person
donated almost 90 percent of the committee's money. "They don't want anybody
to know what's going on. This is an affront to the people of the city."

Begala said rail supporters are trying to distract voters from the real issue:
Metro's plan is "horrendous" and the authority is in "abysmal" financial shape,
including spending millions of taxpayer dollars to promote rail.

"Their comments are likewise as ridiculous as their plan is," Begala said. "it's
shocking that that's what they want to talk about when their own contributors are
special interests who would benefit from the plan."


in other Metro campaign activity Monday:

· U.S. Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston, endorsed Metro's referendum at the
Magnolia Transit Center. He touted the plan for improving air quality and
reducing the noise level from buses.

· The Business Committee Against Rail held a news conference to raise
questions about Metro's light rail cost estimates, pointing out that planners are
considering that an east/west line through downtown might be built in a subway -
- at least doubling the cost for that segment.

Metro Vice President John Sedlak responded that the east/west line has been
designed at street level but could be buried if future engineering deems it
affordable and desirable.

Chronicle reporter Salatheia Bryant contributed to this story.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2183722




=PTP===========================================

[BATN]

Boston Globe
Sunday, October 26, 2003

Highway projects get new scrutiny

By Anthony Flint


WESTWOOD, MASSACHUSETTS -- The long-awaited widening of Route 128
finally began this fall, with bulldozers and backhoes rumbling around
the median at the Route 1 bridge.


The project, creating a fourth lane in each direction between
Wellesley and Randolph, at a cost of $150 million to $200 million, has
a role model of sorts: the $375 million widening of the once-scenic
Route 3 from Burlington to the New Hampshire line, set to open to
drivers next month.


But while these highway-widening projects are cheered by commuters and
most town and business leaders, they may be the last of their kind.


State transportation planners are questioning whether expanding lanes
solves congestion in the long term. They are also fretting about costs
and worry that better highways will encourage more spread-out
development.


The backtrack on highway-widening comes just as the proposed $180
million widening of Route 3 from Weymouth to Duxbury, in a stretch
notoriously clogged with South Shore commuters and Cape-bound drivers,
moves toward the next stages of the planning process. State
Transportation Secretary Daniel Grabauskas said in an interview that
the project -- which would make that stretch of road three lanes in
each direction -- is getting intense scrutiny.


"Adding a lane on Route 3 south is clearly a project that's early
enough in the process that we can apply some new principles and make
an informed judgment," he said. "We're going to look at a host of
things, from environmental impacts, economic development impacts,
smart growth, increases in housing, a whole host of issues."


Governor Mitt Romney has ordered that existing transportation
infrastructure be repaired before new projects are undertaken, an
initiative called "Fix it First." He also wants to see a new set of
standards developed for judging all future transportation projects.


The Route 3 north project has prompted deep skepticism about highway
widening. Drivers and residents say they hate the fact that so many
trees were bulldozed to make way for new lanes in the median, which
made the highway three lanes in each direction. Protesters are
clamoring for new barriers against noise, opposition is swelling over
development proposals linked to the 21-mile expansion, and word
surfaced last week that the arduous project had fallen behind
schedule.


Even some daily users of the highway system in Eastern Massachusetts
say that expanding roads won't solve congestion and indeed may only
induce more people to use their cars -- a prevailing theory among
transportation planners in recent years.


"History shows, widening a road doesn't really solve the problem,
long-term. It just adds more traffic -- or funnels it along to the
next chokepoint," said Adam Gaffin, an editor at Network World, a
trade publication based in Southborough, who uses Route 128 to get
home to Roslindale.


Any future highway-widening projects will be judged in the context of
what other means of travel are available, said Jonathan Carlisle,
spokesman for the Executive Office of Transportation and
Construction. That will be the case with Route 3 south, he said.


"There has been a lot of development on the South Shore, a lot of
people live there who need to get into Boston. But in light of the
water transportation there, the two legs of the Old Colony [commuter
rail] line, and, by 2006, the Greenbush line, we really have to look
at this in the context of existing transit opportunities that are or
will be available," Carlisle said.


State Senator Robert L. Hedlund, a Republican from Weymouth, said that
"there is going to be a lot of angry legislators" if the Romney
administration takes away funding for roadway projects that have been
stuck in long queues behind the Big Dig.


"We've had tremendous growth and the road is over-capacity," he
said. "Adding a lane will help."


Duxbury Selectman Andre M. Martecchini, however, said that if Route 3
is widened, "people will fill it. If it's seen as easier, people will
hop into their cars and go -- until it starts to fill up again."


Another unanswered question, he said, is whether the widening could be
done in an aesthetically sensitive manner.


"The current Route 3 is a beautiful road," he said. "Making it an
extension of the expressway -- what's that going to do for the
character of the surrounding communities?"


The experience with the Route 3 expansion from Burlington to
Tyngsborough has led some residents to become activists, in a suburban
version of the anti-highway protesters of the 1970s who stopped the
inner Belt and Southwest Expressway in Boston.


"There's a limit to the problems we can solve with that approach,"
said Dennis Frenchman, director of the City Design and Development
group at MIT, who lives in Lexington where the widened Route 3 is
being built close to homes. "In the past, access was the only way we
could grow economically. In the future, quality of life, landscape,
and place will be more important. We have to find a way to be
efficient and maintain a sense of place, or we'll end up like New
Jersey or Florida."


Protesters have clamored for more extensive noise barriers and decried
plans for a service plaza in Chelmsford. The contractor on the
project, Modern Continental, is rewarded for promoting what is called
"ancillary development" along the widened roadway.


More bad news for Route 3 north came last week, when the state warned
Modern Continental it was falling behind schedule. The schedule and
the price of the project is supposed to be fixed under the fast-track
construction process known as "design-build," which some lawmakers
would like to see used in the Route 128 expansion. Backers of the
Route 128 widening remain upbeat, although they acknowledge that the
expansion won't solve congestion problems for very long.


"it's a disturbing highway that doesn't function properly, with huge
safety issues because of the use of the breakdown lane at rush hour,"
said Sherri Walker, director of regional economic development at the
Neponset Valley Chamber of Commerce, part of the Route 128 Add-a-Lane
Business Coalition.


Adding the lane, which could cost up to $200 million and take six
years, according to state estimates, "won't make Route 128 a totally
functioning highway, though it will be much better," Walker
said. Commuter rail will still need to be encouraged, she said, and a
proposal to extend the Orange Line to Route 128 should be revisited.


"The big-picture solution." she said, "is getting cars off the road."



Anthony Flint can be reached at flint@globe.com



=PTP==============================================

[CAHSR]

The Virginian-Pilot
Friday, October 24, 2003

Years later, ODU project just can't get off ground

By Dave Addis


"Birthing new technology," said Bob Fenning, "is not for the faint of
heart."


Fenning is the Old Dominion University vice president who is stuck
with the thankless task of explaining to the world -- a world full of
nagging, cost-conscious pragmatists -- why ODU's maglev train
experiment  should be allowed to press
forward.


in a lengthy conversation Wednesday, Fenning sounded at times like a
rational and forward-thinking visionary, a man excited about playing
a role in bringing a dynamic, affordable new mass-transit system to a
nation that really needs one.


At other times, he sounded like a human being who is trying to give
birth to a train, without the benefit of anesthetics. If I were in
his stirrups, I'd be screaming for Darvon. Here's why, in capsule
form:


After three years, $14 million and nearly as many blown promises, the
train won't move, the stations aren't finished and the system is
nowhere near ready to ferry students across the campus.


The project has become a joke among students and a sore subject of
debate among administrators. And, in recent days, lawsuits totaling
$700,000 have been filed by local contractors who claim they've been
stiffed by the company that's building the system.


Another $2 million has been pumped into the kitty by the federal
government, but project officials say $5 million more will have to be
found -- somewhere -- to get the train up and running.


That would bring the total to $21 million -- most of it from the
pockets of taxpayers, and 50 percent over budget -- to magnetically
levitate a tram car and move it a little better than half a mile at
40 mph.


Roughly speaking, that's about double the cost-per-mile that was
promised by American Maglev Technology, the Georgia company that sold
the project to ODU, in partnership with Lockheed Martin Corp. and
Dominion Virginia Power.


AMT's president, Tony Morris, has been flogging his version of a
magnetic-levitation train for years. He was not available to comment
this week, reportedly because he is traveling in the Far East on
business. Fenning acknowledged that nobody at ODU had spoken with
Morris since the lawsuits were filed by the unpaid local contractors.


Here's another reason for ODU and its partners to be nervous: if you
call AMT's phone number in Georgia, as I did, you are connected
instead to an automated telephone-answering system for a company
called Neotonus.


Neotonus  is another of Tony Morris'
companies. Its focus is a magnetic device that is said to help
control female urinary incontinence.


Judging from the effort put into the companies' phones and internet
sites , one could infer that Morris
is betting that magnets will be more successful in controlling a
runaway bladder than a runaway train.


That might seem a harsh judgment, but it's tempered by a study of
Morris' promises over the years, in community after community across
the South, that their economic viability could be greatly enhanced if
only they'd invest in his magnetic-levitation transportation system.


Thus far, little has been levitated other than some taxpayers'
wallets. And money, not science, is at the heart of this tale.


There's no doubt that maglev trains can work; the only advantage the
American Maglev system offers is a promise -- as yet unrealized --
that it can be widely installed at a far lower cost than other
systems that are farther ahead in development around the globe.


So, where does this leave ODU? Fenning said the fresh $2 million from
the feds will be used to execute a discrete set of work orders aimed
at accomplishing two feats: move the train, first, between two guide
beams that are about 180 feet apart, and then move it between two
stations that are about 1,700 feet apart.


After that, the federal money will have been fully levitated and ODU
officials will have to decide if the maglev system has the technical
and economic promise to seek more funds to plow forward, or whether
they should pull the plug.


That decision likely will come in March, Fenning said. He remains
confident, and graciously promised to invite me to a trial run.


in return, I graciously promised to stop by in March and lie down
across the tracks.


Mark your calendars.



Contact Dave at 757-446-2726, or dave.addis@cox.net




=PTP==============================================

http://www.detnews.com/2003/business/0310/24/b01-306226.htm


Detroit News
Friday, October 24, 2003

Historic trolleys are history

By R.J. King / The Detroit News


[PHOTO]
Eight century-old rail cars that have run on tracks along Washington since 1975,
like this one seen in 1976, will be replaced with motorized trolleys as part of a
$20 million road project that will include Woodward and Broadway.


DETROIT -- The historic downtown trolley cars that cost passengers 50 cents to
ride but the city about $100 per rider will be mothballed next month as
Washington Boulevard and two other streets are rebuilt.

The $20 million road project that will include Woodward and Broadway is to be
completed in time for the 2006 Super Bowl at Ford Field.

The eight, century-old rail cars that have run on tracks along Washington since
1975 will be replaced with so-called "rubber trolleys", or modern buses that
mimic the look and feel of a historic street car. The city will expand the routes of
its 14 rubber trolleys, bought in 2000. Downtown business owners support the
change.

About 3,000 passengers ride the rail trolleys each year, but track and rail car
problems have plagued the system. The rubber trolleys offer more dependable
service because they aren't affected by snow and ice and greater flexibility for
special events.

But preservationists say the city's decision is shortsighted because the historic
cars are irreplaceable, though they admit the quarter-mile track that stretches
along Washington from Grand Circus Park to Hart Plaza is in disrepair.

"I'm not happy the rail cars are going, but I would hope the city would look to
move the system to the east riverfront," said Alexander Pollock, a preservationist
and senior associate architect for Detroit. "Cities such as Seattle, San Diego,
Tampa and New Orleans have vintage rail cars operating on their waterfronts."

Last year, the city began a $500-million, four-year plan to improve the east
riverfront from Hart Plaza to Belle isle that will include a riverfront walk, parks
and marina.

George W. Jackson Jr., president and chief executive of Detroit Economic
Growth Corp., a quasi-public development agency in Detroit, said it is too costly
to relocate the rail service as part of the Washington Boulevard makeover.

Pollock said the rail trolley system has an annual budget of around $300,000.

"We do not want to lose the historic trolleys, so we will look at every possibility to
continue their service somewhere else," Jackson said.

You can reach R.J. King at (313) 222-2504 or rjking @detnews.com.


=PTP================================================

http://www.msnbc.com/news/939773.asp#BODY

MSNBC
July 18

Riders up, Amtrak still falls short

Tight budgets keep railroad from exploiting airline industry's hard times
A northbound Amtrak high speed Acela train rolls past commuters at the Amtrak
station in Wilmington, Delaware last year.


By Lynne Shallcross

ABOARD AMTRAK'S METROLINER, July 18 —  Barbara Tedesco is relaxing,
listening to a CD player while her 11-year-old son, Tommy, contentedly flips
through some books and looks out the window. It's not the image conjured up by
a long trip to a relative's house — in her case, from Connecticut to Virginia. But
for Tedesco and millions of others who ride Amtrak's intercity trains, this is the
pleasant reality.


        TEDESCO SAYS making the six-hour trip by train to her sister's house in
Virginia is less of a hassle than flying and more convenient than driving — no
traffic and no weather slow-downs to worry about. And, she adds, it's a lot more
child-friendly than a car or plane. "It allows (Tommy) a lot of movement," she
says. "He doesn't say ‘Are we there yet?' as often."
       "I get to walk around and there's food here," Tommy adds in agreement,
before running off to the dining car. "It keeps me busy."

RECORD NUMBERS
       Amtrak's been busy, too. With many people still shying away from airplane
travel since the 9/11 attacks, this should be a golden opportunity for Amtrak to
win customers away from the industry that has been its nemesis: the airlines.
       indeed, April, May and June of this year brought the highest ridership
numbers for those months in Amtrak's 32-year history. A particular bright spot is
the "Acela Express," a high-speed service running in the Boston-New York-
Washington, D.C. corridor.
       But Amtrak officials caution that the railroad is a long way from making a
profit. While Amtrak is projecting that it will break even this year, officials say, but
the goal set by Congress for the railroad to stop relying on federal funding is
described by Amtrak's spokesman Dan Stessel as "fantasy."

         Stessel and other Amtrak officials cite the huge subsidies the airline
industry receive in the form of the federal air traffic system and now the creation
of the Transportation Security Administration, which handles airport security.
Highways, similarly, they argue, receive billions of dollars a year for construction
and maintenance.
       And yet, Stessel says, "we have to kind of justify our existence every year."
       At a time when transportation analyst suggest that Amtrak should be thriving
and investing in the many high-speed rail corridors being proposed around the
country, the railroad's budget — appropriated each year by Congress — barely
keeps the trains running on time. That leaves dreams of high-speed rail to the
states, which are facing their own budget crises at the moment.


[SIDEBAR]
   fact file
All aboard the money train

The numbers (in $millions) behind several popular Amtrak routes.
Name Route Revenue Cost Profit / (Loss)
California Zephyr Chicago - San Francisco $50.0 $96.5 ($46.5)
Lake Shore Limitied Chicago - Boston.NY $31.2 $69.6 ($38.4)
Texas Eagle Chicago - San Antonio $20.6 $47.8 ($27.2)
Sunset Limited Orlando - Los Angeles $18.9 $51.6 ($32.7)
Acela Express/ Metroliner Boston - Washington, D.C. $370.1 $292.5 $77.6
Southwest Chief Chicago-Kansas City $69.8 $126.1 ($56.3)
Empire Builder Chicago-Seattle/ Portland $51.9 $94.2 ($42.3)
Heartland Flyer Oklahoma City - Fort Worth $5.9 $4.8 $1.1
 Source: Amtrak

A POLITICAL FOOTBALL

      The annual debate on Amtrak's budget, once a major ideological target for
cuts by fiscal conservatives, has calmed somewhat in recent years. Yet as
Congress gets ready to reauthorize the railroad's funding, there are wide
disagreements on Capitol Hill about how much it should get.
       Amtrak requested $1.8 billion for 2004, a figure that covers current
operations and a five year maintenance program meant to put the railroad's fleet
in good order.
       in a reflection of the disagreements that swirl around Amtrak, House and
Senate panels that oversee transportation issues approved multi-year funding
packages that would see Amtrak get $2 billion annually for at least three years.
       But Amtrak enjoys far less support on the powerful appropriations
committees, which ultimately determine the amount of money available for
individual programs. Last Friday, the House appropriations panel put forth its
own figure for Amtrak: $580 million for 2004.
       Stessel says that although he knows the discussion is far from over, $580
million is not a sufficient amount of money. "If there is to be an Amtrak in fiscal
year 2004, there would have to be more than $580 million," he says.
       But Ernest Istook, Jr. (R-Okla.), a key figure on the House Appropriations
subcommittee, says there is not a lot of money to go and what does exist should
go primarily to the highway system.
       "We put the priority where people are paying the taxes," Istook says.
"Highway users pay their own way and they pay a tax on it. That's where the
greatest need is, and that's where people are paying their way."

  High-speed rail remains a dream

AN IMAGE PROBLEM
       Istook also said the committee had some reservations about Amtrak's
credibility. He said that for years, Amtrak has been promising self-sufficiency but
they return every year asking for more money. "That's been about as reliable as
Enron's bookkeeping," Istook says.


[SIDEBAR]
  Dream trains

 High-speed rail proposals in the United States
--  The Chicago hub
--  California's plan
--  Florida's vision
--  Northwest corridor


       Warren Flatau, spokesman for the Federal Railroad Administration, agrees
that increased funding isn't the only answer to Amtrak's problems. He says that
while its accountability has been improving as of late, Amtrak needs to do some
major restructuring. "Amtrak in its current form may not be the best answer,"
Flatau says.
       in spite of all the complaints about Amtrak's structural and monetary
problems, frequent train travelers say it's an essential public service that
government needs to maintain.
       Maryam and Joseph Donnelly, riding the train to Washington, D.C., say that
although they are grateful for the train as a travel option, it's important that
Amtrak concentrate on the routes that are in demand.
       "A lot of what's causing Amtrak to be non-financially productive are the
longer routes that no one's taking that they're still running," Maryam Donnelly
said. "They tend to be everything to everybody."
       Amtrak figures bear her out, showing that trains in the densely populated
northeast corridor are successful, while most long distance trains are money
guzzlers. Railroad officials estimate that the loss on Amtrak's long distance
routes ranges from $131 to $551 per passenger.









PTP Digest 2003/10/27-B = CONTENTS

* Portland: Westside LRT ridership grows with more service
   TriMet News Room  October 27, 2003

 * Houston: Rail foes covet rail funds for highways
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 26, 2003

* Houston: Dem hits deception of 'anti-rail zealots'
   Houston Chronicle  Oct. 25, 2003

* Houston: Rail foes' hanky-panky, political intrigues
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 26, 2003

* Seattle LRT: 'Feds make full funding of transit grant official'
   Seattle Times Saturday, October 25, 2003

* Seattle LRT: 'Victory day for fans of light rail'
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Saturday, October 25, 2003

* Seattle LRT: More on Fed grant breakthrough
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER  Thursday, October 23, 2003

* Seattle op-ed: 'Monorail seems to be off track'
   Seattle Times Sunday, October 26, 2003

* Seattle ed: 'A shrunken Monorail is a dead Monorail'
   Seattle Times Sunday, October 26, 2003



=PTP====================================================

TriMet News Room
October 27, 2003

Westside ridership grows as more service added

Airport MAX extension to Beaverton adds trains & capacity

September's Airport MAX Red Line extension from downtown Portland to
Beaverton boosted Westside MAX ridership and eased crowding. Daily ridership
along the Westside MAX corridor jumped to 28,100, boosted by about 3,000 new
Red Line riders there.

"Extending Airport MAX to Beaverton provides more frequent service and greater
capacity where Westside MAX ridership is heaviest," said TriMet General
Manager Fred Hansen. "It also adds direct airport service for many more riders."

The Red Line extension to Beaverton Transit Center added four trains per hour,
meaning MAX runs every 7 minutes during rush hours. More trains during busy
commute times also means fewer people face standing room only. The number
of people standing dropped 38 percent in September.

The Airport MAX line, which was extended from downtown to Beaverton August
31, added direct airport service to six more stations, including: PGE Park, Kings
Hill/SW Salmon, Goose Hollow/SW Jefferson, Washington Park, Sunset Transit
Center and Beaverton Transit Center.



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 26, 2003


Opponents eye Metro rail funds for highway work

By LUCAS WALL


Opponents of light rail expansion covet the $5.8 billion that Metro is seeking for
new tracks and trains, eager to redirect that money toward increasing the
number of highway lanes 53 percent by 2025.

Rail foes are urging voters to reject the transit-expansion plan on Nov. 4 so they
can shift Metro's proposed light rail spending into new roads. They are touting
something called the 100 Percent Plan being drafted by the Houston-Galveston
Area Council, the region's transportation planning agency. The goal is to cut
current traffic congestion levels in half by 2025 while keeping up with the region's
exploding population.

"If we took that money that's being spent on the rail plan by Metro today and
used it for building out the freeways, the tollways, the major thoroughfares in the
regional plan, we would relieve congestion," Harris County Judge Robert Eckels
said. "As you add more people, you have to add more roadways. We need to
make that money work smarter."

The 100 Percent Plan has mapped out how many highways will be required in
the eight-county region if bigger and more roads are the chief answer to reducing
gridlock. A preliminary estimate from the HGAC indicates that 10,703 lane miles
are needed to achieve significant congestion reduction.

"it's important the public understand there are very good alternatives," said U.S.
Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston. "We will never have a chance to solve our
traffic problems if Metro's rail plan is approved."

Finding the money for the extra asphalt and concrete is a tough task, however.
The HGAC estimates the construction cost at $21.1 billion, but the region will
have only $11.5 billion available for highway building in the next 22 years, if
current funding sources remain constant.

With a $9.6 billion gap to close, highway advocates see the Metropolitan Transit
Authority as one of their best potential cash cows.

Since 1988, Metro has spent 25 percent of its penny sales-tax collections on
"general mobility" distributions to Houston, Harris County and 14 small-city
members. It proposes extending the mobility contracts, used for road
construction and maintenance, from 2009 to 2014 as part of next month's
referendum. That would add $774 million in road work, in addition to the $5.8
billion for 73 miles of rail and $979 million in new bus service.

Light rail critics say merely extending the mobility fund is not enough.

They would like to see Metro's treasury raided for more highway projects, much
as former Houston Mayor Bob Lanier snatched millions of dollars in transit funds
last decade to pay for hiring new police officers.

The foes contend that light rail, running at slow speeds and mostly in streets
within Loop 610, is a waste of tax dollars.

"Redirect those monies to things that do reduce congestion," said Michael
Stevens, a developer leading the anti-rail Texans for True Mobility campaign.

He contends that more than $5.8 billion could be diverted from Metro because
there would be no need to pay for operating and maintaining the proposed trains
if voters kill the transit plan. The transit authority counters that, that money would
have to be spent running buses instead.

"They will generate $8 billion in cash to the bottom line," Stevens said of Metro if
voters refuse to accept more light rail. "That $8 billion is available in reality to
commit to whatever makes sense." That comes close to the $9.6 billion highway
shortfall, he pointed out, and other revenue could be created.

Stevens and others say that a nickel-per-gallon gas tax in the eight-county
metropolitan area, for example, would generate about $125 million per year.
That's almost $3 billion over the next 22 years.

Metro's opponents are counting on Orlando Sanchez, who opposes the
authority's plan, being elected mayor. He could then appoint a majority of the
Metro board and direct them to funnel money into roads.

Sylvester Turner and Bill White, the other two major mayoral candidates, support
rail expansion.

This spring's Houston Area Survey found only 28 percent of those polled favored
bigger highways as "the best long-term solution to traffic problems." More transit
led with 47 percent, while 25 percent favored building urban communities closer
to downtown.

Rail supporters scoff at HGAC's idea of spending almost $1 billion per year
widening highways, about double the current expenditure in the region. It's
fantasy to think Metro would give up its transit tax revenue to pay for more roads,
train boosters say.

Metro Chairman Arthur Schechter is among those questioning the wisdom of
trying to solve the traffic problem with new roads, calling the 100 Percent Plan
nothing more than a "catchy phrase." Massive roads will only create more
sprawl, air pollution and additional congestion as people try to drive farther and
farther, he said.

The $21.1 billion highway figure calculated by the HGAC does not include costs
for buying additional right of way.

Those expenses have skyrocketed in recent years because widening a road now
often requires purchasing hundreds of homes, stores, office buildings,
restaurants and so on.

Costs on the Katy Freeway widening that began earlier this year have ballooned
almost $250 million over initial estimates, partly because of right of way
acquisition.

Alan Clark, the HGAC's chief transportation planner, has acknowledged that at
least one-fifth of the proposed new lane miles would be almost impossible to
build because of limited right of way. But, he said, other capacity improvements
can be made.

Converting major thoroughfares into "super streets" -- expressways similar to
Allen Parkway and Memorial Drive near downtown -- would help ease traffic tie-
ups on major roads, such as Texas 6 and FM 1960, Clark said.

He said it is critical to note that the 100 Percent Plan, which will be finished in the
spring, includes mass transit. Metro's proposed light rail lines are actually part of
the working analysis. Rail critics are campaigning for voters to reject those lines
Nov. 4, which would remove them from the HGAC plan.

But even if that occurs, Clark said, other transit options, such as new bus routes
and commuter rail lines, will be studied.

"There's no question about the fact that transit has to be part of the answer," he
said.

The Texas Transportation institute at Texas A&M University released its annual
Urban Mobility Report last month. It concludes that a diverse set of transportation
options are needed to address congestion. More road construction is needed
but, by itself, won't solve the problem, and public transit provides many benefits.

"Both sides are a little bit right," said Tim Lomax, a research engineer who co-
authored the report. "The thing that is pretty clear is that there is not a single set
of solutions."

Eckels, who chairs the HGAC Transportation Policy Council, and his allies all say
they support mass transit, but only initiatives that are cheaper than Metro's light
rail plan. The county will soon release a commuter rail feasibility study for the
U.S. 290 and Texas 249 corridors showing such a system could be built for $2.5
million per mile -- trains included -- and be up and running within three years.
Those trains could run up to 80 mph on upgraded freight railroad tracks,
according to a study draft.

Metro's light rail plan, Eckels points out, would cost almost $80 million per mile,
take 21 years to build, and likely run no faster than 40 mph. The transit authority
notes that its Nov. 4 referendum includes a commuter line to Missouri City.

Schechter said he would welcome Harris County funding extra lines. But, he
said, light rail must be built so commuters arriving in the city will have a way to
reach their destination.

A commuter train arriving downtown does a Tomball resident no good if he works
in the East End or Greenway Plaza, light rail proponents point out.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2179997




=PTP===================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 25, 2003

Viewpoints


Congressman owes the voters of Houston

By U.S. REP. CHRIS BELL

U.S. Rep. John Culberson has crossed the line and owes the voters of Houston
an apology.

Two weeks ago, Culberson deliberately misled the people when he launched a
sneak attack on Metro's fiscal health. He manipulated the Federal Transit
Administration by feeding them false figures and asking whether they matched
Metro's projected federal grants. Then he tried to confuse voters by flaunting the
FTA's bewildered response as proof of financial mismanagement at Metro. Well,
in the end, the FTA wouldn't play along with Culberson's false accusations,
noting that they didn't come up with the numbers Culberson attributed to the
agency.

Clearly, this was an attempt by Culberson, R-Houston, to play Washington-style
"bait and switch" power politics at the expense of the truth and the voters of
Houston.

The fact is that Metro is in excellent fiscal health. The truth is that the agency's
projections are on target and that Metro is more than capable of delivering on the
transit plan it is proposing. All that is left now are questions about Culberson's
actions.

As a fellow member of Congress, I feel compelled to remind my colleague that
we were elected to go to Washington to advocate for the interests of the Houston
community. Instead, Culberson is on a crusade to keep critical federal funds --
funds raised in Houston by gas taxes -- from coming back to Houston to help us
address our transportation woes. Why does Culberson oppose returning hard-
earned tax dollars to our own community? isn't that what we should be fighting
for in Washington?

Apparently, he only wants to deny Houstonians those options. He has sent tens
of millions of dollars in federal transit funds to other cities around the nation: He
is willing to fund rail transit in Salt Lake City, Dallas and San Juan, Puerto Rico.
But he cannot abide a dollar for rail transit in Houston, where his own
constituents steam in traffic for want of a transit system.

Well, over the past couple of years, Culberson has proven himself to be an anti-
rail zealot, and he is fighting tooth and nail to defeat Metro's referendum on the
Nov. 4 ballot, without regard for the truth, or for the long-term costs to Houston. It
is not that he doesn't want this rail plan. He doesn't really want any rail plan for
Houston.

As an alternative to the Metro plan, Culberson claims to support the "100
Percent Solution" plan. What he doesn't tell our fellow Houstonians, is that the
"100 Percent Solution" plan is a wish list of highways and commuter rail that
would cost tens of billions and require both state and federal gasoline tax hikes,
something his voting record suggests he would be very unlikely to support were it
on the ballot instead.

The other important detail my colleague neglects to tell voters about his
alternative, is that the Metro Solutions transit plan is included in the so-called
"100 Percent Solution" plan. In fact, it is the only element of that plan that
actually includes a source of funding without raising taxes. If Culberson were
serious about the "100 Percent Plan," then he would be naturally supportive of
the current Metro proposal.

Contrary to the false claims of Culberson and his fellow anti-rail zealots, the
Metro plan provides a vast increase in bus service for those in the inner city who
need it most, and a comparable expansion of Park and Ride service for those
commuting to Houston from the suburbs. This is a plan that helps everyone from
Sugar Land to Kingwood, and throughout the city of Houston.

Houston has had more than enough of Culberson's Washington-style politics
and gross distortions of the truth. The people deserve better than demagoguery.
As a member of Congress, I am deeply distressed when one of my colleagues
uses his office to mislead the very voters who chose us to fight for them in
Washington. He owes the Houston community an apology.


Bell, a Democrat, represents Texas' 25th U.S. Congressional District.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2178095



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 26, 2003

Cash disclosure not part of plan

By JOHN WILLIAMS


A QUICK CRUISE around the political finance seas with only eight days left
before the Nov. 4 elections:

· if ideas are the motors that drive politics, money is the fuel.

Local conventional wisdom holds that supporters of an issue must spend three
times as much on advertising as opponents do.

Essentially, it is cheaper in politics to build doubt and suspicion than support.

So important was it to the Metropolitan Transit Authority that it not face a high-
dollar campaign against its transit referendum, including expanded light rail, that
Metro officials reduced their rail proposal with hopes of appeasing opponents.

The gambit failed.


Close to the vest

Suburban apartment developer Michael Stevens, who took part in negotiations
that resulted in a smaller rail plan, has joined hands with other rail opponents to
create Texans for True Mobility. The 501(c)(6) corporation is raising money to
help defeat the referendum.

it's hard to discern how much money Stevens has raised because he has taken
the position that money given to Texans for True Mobility is not a form of
campaign contribution. Based on that assertion, the group is not filing campaign
finance reports disclosing contributions and expenses.

The 501(c)(6), named for the section of the internal Revenue Code that defines
it, was originally created to help business leagues such as chambers of
commerce.

But in recent years, groups advocating political positions have former 501(c)(6)
organizations to mount campaigns to influence policy and legislation.


Pending investigation

in Austin, Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle is investigating the $3
million in contributions that another 501(c)(6) -- the Texas Association of
Business -- spent on legislative races. TAB contends it did not have to disclose
its donors because it did not advocate votes for specific candidacies, although it
has acknowledged that its efforts helped elect Republicans.

Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal has promised to look into the
question as it relates to Texans for True Mobility. He won't disclose his findings,
though, until after the Nov. 4 election, saying he doesn't want to influence the
election results.

According to an e-mail sent to prospective donors last week, the Stevens-backed
group anticipates a budget of $1.9 million.

Citizens for Public Transportation, the pro-rail political action committee headed
by businessman Ed Wulfe, has a budget of $1.4 million.

· Because of the unique corporate status of Texans for True Mobility,
contributors could deduct their donations as business expenses for federal
income tax purposes.

Bernie Phillips, tax manager of the National Association of Accountants, said
money that businesses give to 501(c)(6) corporations is deductible.

if Texans for True Mobility raises $1.9 million, that would mean $665,000 in
deductions, based on a 35 percent tax rate.

But Stevens said he has advised contributors not to count their contributions to
Texans for True Mobility as a business expense.

· Homebuilder Bob Perry and his wife, Doylene, have been the biggest
contributors to the Harris County GOP during the period in which the party has
been running its "Liberal Bill White" promotion aimed at discrediting the mayoral
campaign of businessman Bill White.

According to state campaign finance records, the local party collected $212,100
between June 30 and Sept. 30. Of that, Bob Perry gave $75,000 and Doylene
Perry gave $25,000.

The party spent $147,400, with a large chunk of that going to radio and
advertising aimed at helping mayoral candidate Orlando Sanchez, a conservative
Republican, by branding White a liberal. White served as chairman of the state
Democratic Party, generally linked to the party's moderate factions.

· House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, a longtime rail critic, has
been silent about the Metro rail, bus and road referendum.

in the last couple of years, DeLay has taken a lower public profile on rail, even
though there is no indication he has any less disdain for it than in the past.

in his place, DeLay confidants Stevens and U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-
Houston, have become the public faces of rail opposition, with DeLay staying out
of the limelight.

"We're not divulging strategy, but people know and share his concerns about this
expensive gamble," said DeLay spokesman Jonathan Grella. "Pro-rail forces
want this to be a referendum on personalities rather than policy."

But that doesn't mean DeLay's presence isn't being felt around Houston.

Two longtime political contributors to various causes and candidates say DeLay
has expressed his preference that they not contribute money to the pro-rail side
if they can't support the anti-rail group.

Neither wanted to make a public statement because their companies do
business in Washington, where DeLay is among the nation's GOP power elite.

Grella responded that "pro-rail elites" continually demonstrate "a willingness to
say or do anything to further their agenda, including aggressively trying to
discredit and destroy those who disagree with them.

"We're not going to help them invent irrelevant stories right before Election Day
by responding to accusations from anonymous sources."

· Sanchez has solicited the help of social conservative activist Dr. Steven Hotze
for his mayoral campaign. On Sept. 25, Sanchez's campaign gave Hotze's
Conservative Republicans of Harris County $20,000 for a direct mail
advertisement.

Hotze, a local physician, advocates that government should abide by biblical law.

John Williams' e-mail address is john.williams@chron.com.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2181564



=PTP=================================================

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001774448_sound25m.html

Seattle Times
Saturday, October 25, 2003

Feds make full funding of transit grant official

By Mike Lindblom
Seattle Times staff reporter


More than 30 years after Seattle first considered a modern rail-transit system,
the region has a federal grant to build it.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) yesterday signed a "full funding grant
agreement" to provide $500 million over the next few years for the $2.44 billion
project. The 14-mile line from Tukwila to Westlake Center is scheduled to open
by mid-2009.

The document allows construction to begin in two weeks on the first mile,
extending from the downtown transit tunnel south through Sodo. Kiewit Pacific
will sign a pair of contracts worth $95 million this morning to lay those tracks and
build a maintenance base near the old Rainier Brewery.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., announced the FTA signing in a packed room of
Sound Transit employees and boosters at its Union Station headquarters, calling
light rail "The Little Engine That Could."

"We have reached the end of the tunnel. Light rail means less congestion and
more jobs for Puget Sound," she said. "For a region that has faced some tough
times over the last year or two, this is good news."

The project will create 4,200 construction and design jobs, but "Central Link" is
anticipated to provide only a 1 percent reduction in commuter traffic into
downtown.

Murray and Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Bremerton, congratulated local transit officials
for their perseverance under pressure. Three years ago, cost overruns forced the
agency to reorganize itself, shorten the line and undergo federal reviews.

Murray said she never doubted Sound Transit would prevail because of its unity.

Seattle voters turned down rapid-transit measures in 1968 and 1970, forfeiting
the city's opportunity for federal rail-transit aid until the current plan passed in
1996.

Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com.



=PTP============================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/145475_transit25.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Saturday, October 25, 2003

Victory day for fans of light rail

Signing of deal for $500 million grant sets off celebration

By JANE HADLEY
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

it's official. The deal is done.

"Touchdown! We win!" said King County Executive Ron Sims, chairman of
Sound Transit's board.

Construction on the 14-mile light rail line from Westlake Center to South 154th
Street near Sea-Tac Airport starts in two weeks at the Metro Busway and South
Royal Brougham Way.

All of the emotion pent up in the two and a half years spent seeking a $500
million federal grant agreement poured out at a news conference at Sound
Transit headquarters yesterday, called to announce that the agreement had
been signed in Washington, D.C. The agreement had been held up by an
influential Oklahoma congressman, who dropped his objections to the project
this week.

Hundreds of Sound Transit staff members who jammed the room in their Friday
casual clothes whooped and cheered and gave a standing ovation as Sen. Patty
Murray, D--Wash., Sims and Chief Executive Officer Joni Earl entered the room.

"The moment we have been waiting for has arrived," said Murray, adding the
project would improve transportation and give jobs to 4,000 people designing,
engineering and building the $2.4 billion project.

Perhaps the loudest cheer and longest standing ovation of all went to Earl. She
thanked the Sound Transit board, Murray and Democratic Reps. Norm Dicks and
Adam Smith, but when she talked about her staff, she could not hold back the
tears.

"You guys are terrific," she said.

The staff took "a lot of hits," Earl said, but prevailed with talent and dedication.
"We're going to build a quality project, a safe project."



Earl invited the public to watch the signing of the first construction contracts this
morning at the site of the new light rail maintenance and operations base at
Airport Way South and South Hanford Street.

it was a day to hand out credit -- even to the opposite party.

Sims praised Murray as an "incredible champion" of the project. Murray in turn
praised Dicks as well as the Bush administration, U.S. Transportation Secretary
Norman Mineta and Federal Transit Administrator Jennifer Dorn.

Murray said that without Earl and her staff, "we wouldn't be standing here today."

She also thanked Sims, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels, and other local leaders for
their "tireless advocacy" of the agency, which had been brought low by a light rail
project more than a billion dollars over budget.

in early 2001, federal officials cancelled the $500 million grant agreement and
the agency was swallowed in a sea of controversy from which it only recently
emerged.

The rail line was slashed from 21 miles to its current 14 miles and the completion
date pushed from 2006 to 2009.

Sims said Murray told him: "If you are willing to be an excellent organization, I will
fight for you."

Dicks, speaking over a speakerphone from Washington, D.C., where he was
boarding a plane to attend a Huskies game today, said, "I congratulate everyone
at Sound Transit for the fantastic job you've done turning this operation around."

He thanked Earl, Sims, Snohomish County Executive Bob Drewel and Pierce
County Executive John Ladenburg.

King County Councilman Dwight Pelz and Seattle City Councilman Richard
Mciver called the staff "unsung heroes."

"The people who work at Sound Transit are just fabulous," said Pelz. "This is
your day."

P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or
janehadley@seattlepi.com



=PTP===========================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/145108_transit23.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Thursday, October 23, 2003

Sound Transit clears hurdle

Congressman blocking $500 million grant relents -- with conditions

By JANE HADLEY AND CHARLES POPE
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTERS

The Seattle area's long-awaited light rail line broke most of the way through the
one remaining roadblock to the start of construction yesterday, as the Oklahoma
congressman who has blocked a key federal grant for the project stepped aside -
- conditionally.

The breakthrough came just two days before favorable bids for the project are
set to expire.

Rep. Ernest Istook Jr., the Republican chairman of the House subcommittee that
hands out federal transportation dollars, released a letter late in the day saying
he will withdraw his objections to the $500 million full-funding grant agreement
on three conditions.

"We're very encouraged, but we're still digesting" Istook's letter, said Ric
ilgenfritz, Sound Transit's chief of communications. "Nobody's popping any corks
yet."

Istook's conditions are:

That the entire 18-member Sound Transit board must pass a resolution
incorporating the statements and commitments made in an Oct. 2 letter,
including promises not to siphon away money from the Eastside or other areas
for the light rail project. The letter was signed by King County Executive Ron
Sims, chairman of the Sound Transit board, and three other board members.
The commitments must be included in language of the federal grant.

The board must agree that it will not ask for more than $500 million. The grant
agreement had been written, Istook said, to suggest that Sound Transit would
get at least $500 million and might ask for more. The grant language must make
$500 million a ceiling rather than a floor.

Land on the "critical path" right-of-way along the Tukwila freeway section of the
14-mile line must be acquired by October of next year.

The decision by Istook came one day after he and two Washington state
Republican members of Congress, Jennifer Dunn and George Nethercutt, failed
in their effort to persuade the White House to kill the project. President Bush has
promised $75 million for Sound Transit next year, and his aides turned aside a
request to withdraw that funding.


The $500 million federal grant, which would still have to be appropriated by
Congress in annual dollops, makes up 20 percent of the $2.4 billion project to
build a light rail line from Westlake Center in downtown Seattle to South 154th
Street near Sea-Tac Airport.

Congressional Democrats who support the light rail project said the first two
conditions would be easily met. The third, involving property acquisition in
Tukwila, is a question mark, ilgenfritz said, and needs to be further investigated.

Sound Transit's 18-member board holds a regular board meeting today and is
expected to discuss and act on Istook's letter.

in addition, the Federal Transit Administration, which notified Istook in July that it
intended to sign the grant agreement, must decide whether to alter the grant
agreement to satisfy Istook's conditions and then sign the agreement. FTA
officials could not be reached yesterday.

Sound Transit will not get a "green light" for construction until it has the signed
agreement in hand, ilgenfritz said.

But two of the project's most stalwart supporters, Rep. Norm Dicks and Sen.
Patty Murray, treated Istook's letter as close to a green light.

The two Washington Democrats said they expect FTA Administrator Jennifer
Dorn to move quickly to issue the full-funding grant agreement.

"I would think it would be done immediately," Dicks said.

The inclusion of the third condition involving Tukwila property came as a surprise
to ilgenfritz and to a prominent light rail opponent, King County Councilman Rob
McKenna, who said he didn't know what to make of it.

The U.S. Transportation Department's inspector general mentioned it in one
paragraph of his 42-page report in July as one of several issues that could affect
the schedule or cost of the project.

ilgenfritz said the issue had not arisen in discussions with federal officials, and
he knew of no particular problems looming with regard to property acquisition in
the Tukwila section of the line.

"We're confident in our schedule, and we think we've got the budget and
resources to stick to it," he said.

Steve Lancaster, director of Tukwila's Department of Community Development,
said he was not aware of any problems or controversies involving land
acquisition in that segment of the line.

One potential concern of such a condition might be that it could give maximum
leverage to property owners in their negotiations with Sound Transit, potentially
threatening the schedule.

Construction bids of close to $100 million, which came in 15 percent below
engineer's estimates, expired two weeks ago and were extended until tomorrow.
It's possible the grant agreement would not be signed by then, but Dan Howell,
project manager for Kiewit Pacific, the contractor who submitted the successful
bid, said he needs to check with higher-ups in his company. It is likely that Kiewit
would extend its bid for a few more days until the federal agreement could be
assigned.

Sound Transit has been waiting anxiously for a state Supreme Court decision on
the validity of initiative 776, which sought to eliminate the motor vehicle tax
revenues that Sound Transit collects. Istook has expressed concern about the
effect of the initiative on Sound Transit's finances if it is upheld.

But in the end, apparently with an eye on the expiring bids, Istook stepped aside
without waiting for the court to issue its decision.

Despite the i's still to be dotted and t's to be crossed, Sound Transit's allies
cheered Istook's announcement.

"This has been one of the toughest fights that I can remember in my 27 years on
the Appropriations Committee," Dicks said. "But the merits prevailed, and I'm
pleased."

Added Murray: "Sound transit has had everything thrown at it in the last two
years, and there have been many days when people wondered whether we'd get
to where we are now.

"Despite all those tough days, at the end of the day we can say that Sound
Transit has a project that has passed every hurdle. So that inherently means it
will be a better project."

Istook's decision to retreat marked a significant setback for Dunn, who has been
among the most vocal opponents of the project, arguing that it would divert
scarce resources from transportation projects in her Eastside congressional
district and across the state. She also insisted that Sound Transit's light rail
system would not cure the region's notorious congestion.

State Transportation Secretary Doug MacDonald has written Congress that the
project would provide significant congestion relief.

Under Sound Transit board policy, the transit district is divided into five subareas:
East King, North King, South King, Pierce County and Snohomish County.

The 14-mile light rail project is being paid for mostly by the North King subarea,
which is made up mostly of Seattle, and partly by the South King subarea.

The other three subareas are contributing no money to the project, but County
Councilman McKenna and Dunn have expressed fear that if there were cost
overruns, the board would be forced to change its policy and dip into funds from
other areas, particularly East King, which has a huge surplus of unspent money.

McKenna claimed victory yesterday, maintaining that Istook's conditions would
mean that the federal grant would now have to explicitly bar Sound Transit from
raiding funds from other areas in the event of cost overruns.

"This is huge," McKenna said.

Dunn was not available for comment, but in a statement, she said Istook's
approach would protect people in her district as well as money for transportation
projects across the state.

"I applaud his decision and am encouraged by this new decision that will keep
local funds within the regions where they are collected in order to pay for projects
that indeed reduce congestion," she said.

Nethercutt, who represents the 5th District in Eastern Washington, came to a
similar conclusion.

"All along my concerns with Sound Transit have been about protecting
commuters' interests," he said in a statement. "The conditions outlined by
Chairman Istook keep Sound Transit from pitting commuter against commuter in
the Puget Sound region."

But the larger question beyond Sound Transit's future is how much damage the
fight did to Washington's congressional delegation.

"I've been in Congress a long time, and I've never seen the delegation, frankly,
go at each other as it did on this particular project," said Dicks, who represents
Tacoma and the Olympic Peninsula.

"The project was ranked at the top in almost every single area" by federal
transportation officials. "What they were doing was holding up some Holy Grail
project, some perfect project, and when you compare it to other projects that
were getting funded, we were ranked higher and had better capability than all of
them," he said.

Dicks and Murray, ardent Democrats both, showered praise on the Republican
White House for standing fast against the request by Istook and Dunn to deny
funding.

"I was pleased the administration stayed with the president's budget," Dicks said,
noting that Bush had included $75 million for Sound Transit in his fiscal 2004
budget.

As for a meeting that Istook, Dunn and Nethercutt had with Bush's senior political
adviser, Karl Rove, Dicks said, "I think it was an effort to try and get the
administration to change its position."

Dicks also stressed that once he had heard about the meeting, he made sure to
contact the White House as well.

Still, given Sound Transit's difficult history, Murray said she would not fully
celebrate until the funding agreement was delivered.

"I'm not doing my dance yet. I'm waiting until I see that signature on that little
piece of paper," she said.

P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or
janehadley@seattlepi.com



=PTP==================================================

Seattle Times
Sunday, October 26, 2003

Monorail seems to be off track

Nicole Brodeur / Times staff columnist

We taxpayers sure do appreciate being updated on the progress of the monorail.

it's just that it always seems to be bad news.

in August, we learned that the monorail's tax revenues had come in at one-third
below projections. In other words, the monorail board thought it had more money
than it did.

Not a single inch of rail has been laid down for this thing, and already, the guys
in charge are losing money. Worse, they're shirking their responsibility for the
mess.

Monorail leaders blamed the shortfall on the lack of reliable data from other
agencies.

But really, it was they who didn't take the time to investigate how much money
could be raised from a car tax in Seattle.

And it was they who cut corners by basing their numbers on those collected by
Sound Transit. That's like taking child-care advice from Courtney Love. You're
just asking for trouble.

Former monorail board member Dick Falkenbury admitted as much the other
day:

"We had such an extremely short timeline," he said, "And there was real
pressure not to question things. ... 'On time and on budget.' That was the
mantra."

That's great to hear, when you're talking about a $1.7 billion project. Details be
damned, let's get this on the ballot and figure out the numbers later. If they had
known more, maybe Seattle voters wouldn't have passed the thing last year.

But they did, approving a 14-mile Green Line from Crown Hill to West Seattle, to
be paid for by an annual tax on vehicle tabs in the city. The tax rate starts at $85
for every $10,000 of vehicle value and goes up to $140 per $10,000 next year.


They voted out of frustration with longtime traffic problems; with hope that a
home-grown project would be easier to fund and manage; and with no small
measure of nostalgia, seeking to preserve a bit of the ever-changing city's past.

But there were some who didn't play fair, and registered their cars outside of
Seattle to avoid the monorail tax.

it all forced the monorail board to — say it with me, people — spend more
money. Another $52,000 for an independent investigation of their own practices.

Not an inch of rail, and the monorail board had to pay to have itself investigated.
Lordy.

Other things make you wonder: Stations proposed and scrapped, ridership
numbers that change so often, the board must have given up on pens.

And there is that sick feeling I get when someone mentions the monorail, and
everyone else snickers or sighs.

The monorail has turned into public transportation's answer to MTV's newlywed,
Jessica Simpson: Pricey, exasperating and not the brightest thing. We can't stop
watching.

But we can draw some hope from Sound Transit, another Ghost Train that may
come back to life, now that it got the $500 million in federal funds it needs to
break ground.

There's a chance things could work for the monorail, but right now, there's just
suspicion, sighs and snickers.

Not an inch of rail, and already, we feel like we're being taken for a ride.

Reach Nicole Brodeur at 206-464-2334 or nbrodeur@seattletimes.com.

More columns at www.seattletimes.com/columnists



=PTP================================================

Seattle Times
Sunday, October 26, 2003

Editorial

A shrunken Monorail is a dead Monorail



The Seattle Monorail Project promised to be different.

"We are operating in the shadow of Sound Transit," said Monorail Chairman
Tom Weeks on Oct. 3, 2002. "By going second, we have the opportunity to learn
from their successes and their mistakes."

That was right. Monorail is not going to get the same slack. A drastically
shrunken or changed monorail route, either because of faulty financial planning
or a failure to meet engineering expectations, is a dead monorail. Too many
promises were made too solemnly for them to be forgotten.

in a presentation to The Seattle Times, Weeks said, "We commit to the full 14
miles of the route, and if we can't do that, we go back to the voters."

Monorail also committed to borrow no more than $1.5 billion. It is still committing
to those things.

But the system is beginning to shrink in other ways:

• A station at Safeco Field has been unfortunately dropped. That conflicts with
one of the presumed advantages of monorail — stepping off the Monorail directly
to a game.

• The debate over whether the Monorail goes through, or around, Seattle Center
is far from over. That disagreement between Monorail authorities and influential
members of City Council undoubtedly precedes other disagreements to be
discovered as the route plows through downtown and city neighborhoods.

• There is additional talk of saving money by leaving out escalators at stations,
and there is talk of having sections of single track. This shrinkage is because
revenues are one-third short.

There is a long story about how this happened, but essentially, Monorail
directors and management weren't focused on revenues. Sound Transit had no
problem with revenues; it had a problem with costs.

Monorail put out a 25-page report in July 2002 to think of all the things that might
raise costs — everything from not getting city permits to acts of terrorism. It
wasn't thinking enough about revenues.

The other problem was that Monorail executives were focused on the November
2002 election. This was the election that would put them into business. They
chose a tax rate lower than their financial officer recommended because they
wanted to win the election — which they did, by 877 votes in a city of more than
half a million residents.

The good news is that Seattle voters do not have to take the agency's word.
Monorail's commitment to design and build should make the difference.

Two bidding teams are being asked to accept a contract to design, build and
operate Seattle Monorail at a fixed price. These teams are still both in the game,
saying that it is still doable. When their bids come in, we will know whether we
can afford this system or not.






[PTP NOTE TO RECIPIENTS:  We've had a major Email software failure (i.e.,
crash), and now seem to be recovering.  Consequently, some important items
have backlogged.  So there may be a couple of extra PTP mailings imminently to
catch up.]

PTP Digest 2003/10/27-A = CONTENTS

* Honolulu: BRT out, rail transit in?
   Honolulu Star-Bulletin Thursday, October 23, 2003

* Houston Metro: Rail foes should reveal backers
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 24, 2003

* Houston: Anticipating LRT, 'Main Event' previews urbane CBD
   Houston Chronicle  Oct. 23, 2003

* Houston op-ed: Hypocrisy abounds in Metro Solutions campaign
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 24, 2003

* Portland: Art+history features in interstate line LRT stations
   The Tribune - Portland Fri, Oct 17, 2003

* Denver: LRT Lakewood-Golden line planning moves ahead
   Rocky Mountain News October 23, 2003

* Charlotte: LRT station ads eyed as big revenue source
   Charlotte Observer Thursday, Oct 23, 2003



=PTP===========================================

http://starbulletin.com/2003/10/23/news/index.html

Honolulu Star-Bulletin
Thursday, October 23, 2003

State, city prepare new plans for transit

Harris' proposal for bus rapid transit draws bipartisan criticism

By Crystal Kua
ckua@starbulletin.com


The state will unveil on Monday a combination of light rail, a bus system and
road changes, including an elevated highway, to combat Oahu traffic congestion.

"There is no silver bullet," state Transportation Director Rodney Haraga said.
"One transportation mode is not going to solve our problem."

Haraga said details will be released after the plan is presented to Gov. Linda
Lingle and members of a city and state task force looking for solutions to the
island's traffic woes.

Haraga's comments came on the same day a bipartisan group of state and city
lawmakers and community members called on Mayor Jeremy Harris to dump his
bus rapid transit system, or BRT.

The debate over the system also comes as the City Council's transportation
committee takes up a resolution today calling for the development of a fixed-rail
transit plan, more than 10 years after a Council vote killed the last rail plan.

"I think now is the apt time that we put the brakes on the bus rapid transit
program and get the city and state government to work together on a common
solution to our mass transit programs," said Councilman Charles Djou.

But the mayor said he will not stop the first phase of his plan that will take hybrid
gas-and-electric express buses from downtown through Kakaako and end in
Waikiki.

"It seems that every time we get ready to do something constructive, a number of
politicians in this town get afraid, and they want to stop things to study them
longer," Harris said. "I'm here to tell you 35 years of study is enough. It's time we
took some action, and that's exactly what we intend to do."

Controversial aspects of the bus plan -- taking away lanes on Kapiolani and
Dillingham boulevards for exclusive use -- are not part of a $50 million first phase
that is scheduled to begin construction later this year. Harris said the first phase
will include sidewalk improvements, landscaping, underground utilities, bus stop
upgrades and the addition of extra lanes on Ala Moana and Kalia Road for
semiexclusive use by buses.

Haraga, meanwhile, said an in-town bus system is part of the plan he will present
to the task force.

"We have to go into a multimodal system, which would include mass transit of
some form, which would be the light rail. It will include some type of highway
improvements or modifications, and it will include a bus system," Haraga said.

"We know that whether you call it BRT, whether you call it transit, whether you
call it whatever, we still know that you need that because even if ... everybody
agrees that light rail is one of the viable solutions or modes, you still need to
distribute folks downtown or in town, and the most viable alternative then would
be buses."

A rail proponent, Harris also said his BRT plan does not preclude a rail system,
but it would take six to 10 years to come to fruition, while the BRT can be
implemented now. He said the City Council has already given the green light for
the first phase, and final federal approval is pending.
	
Lingle said she has not yet been briefed by Haraga.

"I'm interested to see how he puts the pieces together," Lingle said. "One thing
the (task force) is unanimous about ... we don't need any more studies, we just
need some decisions to be made, take those decisions to the public to determine
their level of interest or opposition and move forward."

The state is trying to estimate what a system would cost, Haraga said.

"We're trying to get a better handle on what it is, that if we were to go with light
rail, if we were to go with a Nimitz (Highway) flyover or whatever it is, we need to
get a handle on the cost because my question is, How are we going to pay for
it?" Haraga said.

Djou was among several state and city legislators, both Republicans and
Democrats, who represent the areas affected by the BRT and who signed a
petition opposing it.

"Should we keep putting money into BRT if it's not going to solve our problems?
And we're saying, 'Stop, let's take a look, let's find the correct solution.'" said
Council Chairwoman Ann Kobayashi, who along with Djou and Councilman Rod
Tam have introduced a resolution calling for the city administration to delay the
project.




=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 24, 2003

Metro demands anti-rail identities

Texans for True Mobility spokesman says backers 'scared' of retaliation

By TONY FREEMANTLE


Supporters of Metro's $7.5 billion, 22-year transit plan demanded Friday that its
opponents reveal who is backing their anti-rail "educational foundation" and stop
running advertisements based on incorrect financial data.

The plan's opponents countered that the law does not require them to reveal
their backers and that the radio and television ads don't mention the disputed
numbers.

The dueling press conferences held Friday were prompted by a letter released
the day before from the Federal Transit Administration stating it did not vet
funding figures used by rail opponents to claim Metro was overestimating by
$116 million the federal funds it would have for rail expansion.

Last month, rail opponents, including U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, and
Harris County Judge Robert Eckels, released a chart prepared by the House
Appropriations Committee which they said compared Metro's budget numbers
with projections by the FTA of how much money the transit agency would in fact
receive from the federal government.

in a letter to U.S. Rep. Nick Lampson, D-Beaumont, FTA Administrator Jennifer
Dorn said her agency "did not produce the chart or the figures included therein."

Metro's supporters pounced on the letter Friday to denounce the opposition for
"misleading" voters and said Texans for True Mobility, the group leading the
opposition, should pull ads based on those numbers.

"We need honest and fair facts," said Ed Wulfe, the Houston developer who
heads Citizens for Public Transportation, the pro-rail political action committee.
"The arrogance that they (opponents) continue to show is divisive to our
community."

Chris Begala, spokesman for Texans for True Mobility, would not concede that
Culberson erred by saying emphatically, as he did on local television, that the
FTA had provided the data showing a $116 million shortfall.

"Ernest Istook (the chairman of the appropriations subcommittee for
transportation) says those numbers are correct and they were put together
based on numbers provided by the FTA," Begala said. "The committee is a
higher authority than the FTA's numbers. Istook's office oversees the FTA's
numbers."

Metro admits to a difference of $43 million between its projections and the Bush
administration's six-year transit funding proposal. The authority contends the rest
of the supposed $116 million discrepancy is caused by the failure of the
appropriations committee to include $66 million in federal grants already
received by Metro and a $7 million clean-air grant from the state.

Regardless of how much the budget shortfall is, Begala said Texans for True
Mobility believes Metro lacks money to complete a plan that includes 73 new
miles of rail, 44 new bus routes, a doubling of HOV lanes and $774 million in
roadwork.

"Let's give them their argument," Begala said. "They're right. We're $50 million
off and we're 11 days out from the election. If they don't have those dollars, they
are not sufficiently solvent to go out and undertake a project of that magnitude."

Wulfe said Texans for True Mobility's refusal to reveal its backers demonstrated
the organization's "contempt for voters." Wulfe further said the organization is
running ads based on the "misleading information conjured up by Mr. Culberson"
and should pull them off the air.

Begala said the campaign had no plans to do so and called Wulfe's demands
"absolutely ludicrous."

The backers of Texans for True Mobility did not wish to reveal themselves to the
public, Begala said, because "they are scared of (retaliation from) very powerful
entities affecting their ability to live and work in this community."

The Harris County district attorney's office is looking into whether the group's
refusal to disclose its backers is unlawful.

in another development Friday, the Houston Association of Realtors' board of
directors voted to endorse the Metro plan.

"it's the price of admission to be a world-class city," said HAR Director Rob Cook
of Robert D. Cook Properties. "I've lived in Houston since 1975, and millions of
dollars have been spent on transportation studies. Metro's plan might not be
perfect, but it's a start. It's time to quit talking and get moving."


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2178530



=PTP============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 23, 2003

Rush-hour break a Main attraction

Four blocks closed to traffic for weekend sidewalk cafes

By DAVID KAPLAN and MIKE SNYDER


Downtown is joining outdoor cafe society.

Starting Oct. 31, Main Street between Capitol and Congress will be closed to
auto traffic Friday and Saturday nights.

Main Street restaurateurs will put out tables and chairs almost as far as the curb,
and the street will become a sidewalk.

The four-block strip will feature a mix of entertainment -- called "The Main Event"
-- including live music, dancers and laser light shows.

Business and civic leaders are targeting downtown workers who they believe will
prefer spending late Friday afternoons drinking wine alfresco over fighting
freeway traffic.

"And once Houstonians use it, word gets out, and it becomes a tourist attraction,"
said Jordy Tollett, president of the Greater Houston Convention and Visitors
Bureau.

The Main Event will run Fridays from 4 p.m. to 2 a.m. and Saturdays from 7 p.m.
to 2 a.m. Cross streets within the sidewalk cafe district will remain open to cars.

if it's a hit on Fridays and Saturdays, it will be rolled out on Sundays in six
months or so, and could eventually run seven days a week -- "but only if it makes
sense," said Susan Elmore, chairwoman of the nonprofit group Houston
Downtown Alliance.

There is also talk of making the area a Sunday brunch destination with live
gospel and jazz.

The Main Event will not be a street festival, noted Bob Eury, executive director of
the Downtown District. Its purpose is to create an "attractive, vibrant
environment" to complement downtown businesses.

The atmosphere of the Main Event will change as the night progresses, said
Libby Weathers, director of the Downtown Entertainment District Alliance, a
group comprised mostly of downtown business owners. During happy hour, she
said, there will be a cultural mix of high-energy bands, from cover to Texas to
salsa.

At the dining hour, the music will be softer and more romantic and may feature a
classical quintet.

Roving performers will include dancers, contortionists and magicians.

Organizers hope the Main Event will lure a new demographic to the downtown
restaurant, nightclub and bar scene.

"We want to take advantage of people who work here," said Barry Mandel,
president of the Houston Downtown Alliance. Mandel noted that downtown is
already packed with young revelers on Saturdays around midnight.

With the soon-to-arrive strip of festive sidewalk cafes, Mandel said, downtown
businesses can go after the "low-hanging fruit" -- the almost 200,000 downtown
workers.

Light rail will be an integral component of the Main Event.

"After work on Friday you won't have to get in your car and find a parking spot
downtown," said Tollett. "If you work downtown or in the Medical Center, you can
hop on light rail and ride to lower Main, and after drinking, dining and listening to
music, you can get back on the rail and go back to your car."

Tollett had a strong role in conceptualizing the Main Event, as did members of
DEDA's steering committee, including Joe Martin, the owner of M Bar.

For downtown restaurant and bar owners, who have endured a very rough two
years, these are heady times.

After all the construction work, which severely cut into their businesses,
downtown is turning around: A variety of aesthetic improvements are almost
complete and light rail arrives in a little more than two months.

John Zotos, owner of St. Pete's Dancing Marlin bar and restaurant, said all he
has been hearing the past two years is, "How long can you hold out?"

David Edwards, owner of the Mercury Room, Zula and Boaka Bar, said many
downtown businesses did go under, and among the survivors is a feeling that
finally the good times are returning.

Edwards and Zotos are board members of DEDA. The group helped plan the
Main Event.

City Councilwoman Carol Alvarado, whose district includes downtown, was
instrumental in developing the street closing plan.

Last week, the council changed a city ordinance to reduce the cost and time
required to establish sidewalk cafes. The change eliminates the need to hire
engineers or surveyors to draw up site plans, instead allowing businesses to
draft simpler plans themselves.

Tollett said Mayor Lee Brown had instructed city department heads to cooperate
in an effort to anticipate and deal with such regulatory issues.

Also on Oct. 31, downtown will see the debut of bicycle rickshaws, also known as
bike cabs.

The 20 bike cabs will be operated by Lone Star BikeCAB. A person can flag a
bike or phone the company's owner who will radio one of his riders.

Tollett hopes a number of boutiques will eventually spring up along Main Street
to heighten what he describes as the "walking entertainment mall" atmosphere
that is developing.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2176281



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 24, 2003


Light rail game: rank hypocrisy

By RICK CASEY


IF DANTE'S hell has varying levels for degrees of hypocrisy, where will the
following players spend eternity?

· Texans for True Mobility: This group is bellowing in TV and radio ads and direct
mail pieces that the Metro light rail plan "costs too much, does too little."

The group appears to be spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to oppose
Metro's light rail plan.

On its Web site, TTM offers a list of "news clippings," the first of which is from a
publication called the Houston Review. The article, "The Metro Money Train,"
luridly lists some of the major contributors to Citizens for Public Transportation,
the political action committee advertising in favor of light rail.

The article notes that contributors tend to be companies that expect to profit from
light rail.

Siemens Transportation Systems, for example, gave "a staggering" $50,000.
Siemens is selling the cars to Metro.

Other contributors are architects, engineers and landholders and developers who
stand to benefit from the project.

Crescent Real Estate Equities, for example, owner of Greenway Plaza and
downtown real estate, both of which will be served by rail, gave $25,000. So did
Fulbright & Jaworski, the mega-law firm that does bond work.

This information is known because Citizens for Public Transportation filed the
required disclosure forms -- something Texans for True Mobility refuses to do.

So TTM is happy to tell you who is funding the other side of the debate. They
just won't say who's funding their side.

TTM officials take this hypocrisy to a higher level by saying they don't have to
disclose their finances because they are a nonprofit engaged in education, not
telling people how to vote.

This is so patently untrue that even their announcers have a hard time
swallowing it. One of their radio ads concludes with this line: "Paid for by Texans
for True Mobility." But another concludes: "Political ad paid for by Texans for
True Mobility."

· The Metropolitan Transit Authority: For more than a month, Metro has been
running slick newspaper and television ads touting the virtues of its light rail plan.

idealized artists' renderings of sleek trains pulling into tree-shaded stations turn
hard steel into warm fuzzies.

Metro officials say it's acceptable to use taxpayer and bus rider money to pay for
this advertising blitz because they are simply informing voters of the program, not
seeking their vote.

They say this with the same straight face that TTM officials use in saying their
efforts are simply educational.

Metro officials estimate that from the time they called the election through
Election Day, the cost of the, um, educational campaign will be $3 million. This
includes creative and production costs as well as air time and print space. (The
agency, it should be noted, ran ads before calling the election.)

if you're a taxpayer who disagrees with the plan, you've got a good gripe about
your taxes going to promote the other side.

· Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt: His Web site
(www.tax.co.harris.tx.us/) features in its most prominent position five "featured
items."

Three of them attack Metro's funding plans for its light rail proposal.

One, for example, is titled: "What METROs (sic) Not Telling Us About Their
Revenue Forecast: Bettencourt To inform The Public."

Bettencourt is, of course, (all together now) simply educating the public. He
certainly isn't using his official taxpayer-funded Web site to oppose the Metro
proposal.

He also links to copies of several negative articles about Dallas' light rail system,
but not to any readily available positive articles. (Bettencourt's guilt is mitigated
by technical incompetence. The copies are illegible.)

You can write to Rick Casey at P.O. Box 4260, Houston, TX 77210, or e-mail
him at rick.casey@chron.com.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2176026





=PTP========================================

http://www.portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?email&id=20936


The Tribune - Portland
Fri, Oct 17, 2003

Art to the MAX

Portland's new interstate light-rail line is a trip in itself

 By DON HAMILTON


[PHOTO]
At the interstate/Rose Quarter station, "The Silicon Forest," by Brian Borrello, is
a metaphor for displacement and change. The glass trees generate electricity
through solar panels.



   if art tells stories, you'll find tales of change, hardship and optimism all along
TriMet's new interstate MAX line.
   it's all right there in the 10 stations and their 10 art projects. Each is designed
to reflect the history and the culture of the people who have lived nearby.
   The $350 million extension of light rail -- to be called the Yellow Line -- won't
open until May 1. But the 10 art projects are being installed this fall; by
November, the project will be 90 percent complete.
   "Artists are storytellers," said Mary Priester, TriMet's public art manager. "They
tell their stories with visual elements, but they approach the stations in similar
ways, telling their own version of that neighborhood's story."
   Public art along the 5.8-mile line cost $1.4 million, a figure based on the
agency policy of spending 1.5 percent on art. The figure, reached through a
formula that excluded land acquisition and the cost of cars, is less than the $2
million spent on art installed along the 20-station west-side line.
   in 2000, TriMet created its interstate MAX Art Committee, which then set out in
search of neighborhood voices to help set an artistic theme for each station. The
interviews conducted not only set themes but also formed the basis of a book
called "intersections," an oral history with voices from Vanport, Albina, the Expo
Center and other stops along the line.
   The new line works its way north from the Rose Quarter to the Expo Center,
right through the heart of what have been, at various times, Portland's poorest
and most turbulent neighborhoods.
   Consider drugs, gangs, riots and poverty. Consider shipyards, stockyards,
Japanese relocation camps and the neighborhoods lost to make way for a
hospital, an interstate and Memorial Coliseum. And consider the Vanport flood
and the lively night life that once drew Sammy Davis Jr., Count Basie and Duke
Ellington.
   Columns, benches, railings, sculpture, platforms and elements at stations all
along the line reflect these stories.
   "No true progress," TriMet General Manager Fred Hansen wrote in the
introduction to the oral history, "can be made without sharing and honoring our
collective history."



=PTP================================================

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_23698
00,00.html

Rocky Mountain News
October 23, 2003

RTD presents report on proposed rail line

By Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain News

LAKEWOOD - Whether the proposed light-rail line through Lakewood to Golden
can be built is expected to be decided by the federal government by the end of
this year.

But voters won't decide on the light-rail line for at least another year.


Regional Transportation District officials presented the final version of the
required environmental-impact statement on the line to the public Wednesday
night at the Sheraton Hotel here.

The session drew about 45 people. It was the last viewing of the report before it
goes to the Federal Transit Administration for review. A decision could come
before the new year.

But funding for the estimated $492 million project is highly dependent on voter
approval of a proposed hike of 0.4 percent in RTD's sales tax, to a full penny per
dollar. The plan, called FasTracks, would build six new rail corridors, extend
three existing ones and expand bus service. The earliest RTD plans to ask for
voter approval is November 2004.

With the tax hike, the Lakewood-Golden line could be completed in 2010.
Relying on current funding, though, it wouldn't be built until after 2025.

The 13-mile line requires RTD to purchase a dozen single-family homes and
remove 179 multifamily residences from along the right of way. In addition, 34
businesses would be displaced.

Since the draft of the report was released in March, RTD received 1,180
comments on it from residents, businesses, agencies and local governments. As
a result, some changes were made. The most noticeable was RTD's decision to
beef up measures aimed at reducing noise from the trains.

Light rail is generally considered so quiet it has to run with horns and bells to be
heard when approaching from behind.

But concerns about track noise led RTD to pledge a noise barrier, 3 feet high, on
both sides of the track from Harlan to Oak streets. The report results showed
RTD would be required to build those walls for only a small portion of that
distance.

in addition, RTD Project Manager Dave Hollis said, RTD agreed to blare the
trains' horns when they cross streets at grade level.



=PTP=============================================

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/local/7080702.htm

Charlotte Observer
Thursday, Oct 23, 2003

Big ads considered for light rail stations

Officials say displays could earn as much as $32,000 per site yearly

DIANNE WHITACRE
Staff Writer

Charlotte's 15 light-rail stations may have six large display ads when they open
three years from now -- a move that transit officials are considering to raise
money.

The Metropolitan Transit Commission on Wednesday asked its staff to start
drafting an ordinance that would allow the advertisements. The ads could raise
$25,000 to $32,000 annually at each station, marketing manager Olaf Kinard
said. He based that estimate on ad prices at rapid-transit stations in other cities,
including Atlanta, Denver and Dallas.

Currently, ads are not allowed in the public right of way, where the stations will
be located near South Boulevard and the Norfolk Southern rail line. So the city's
zoning ordinance would have to be changed. That may happen next year, after a
public hearing.

The proposal comes three years after the Charlotte Area Transit System
eliminated ads from the exterior of its bus fleet in an attempt to improve their
appearance.

Mayor Pat McCrory noted the city's long fight against billboards and said the
transit station ads should not face the street. They should be inside the stations,
where transit passengers would see them.

Ads would not be allowed at bus stops or bus shelters, Kinard said.

The proposal affects only Charlotte because the planned light-rail line runs only
within the city. Later, the same policy would be considered for the four other
transit lines, which will run through the city as well as Cornelius, Huntersville,
Davidson and Matthews. Those towns will discuss allowing the shelter ads in
their jurisdictions later.

in other action, the transit commission set a $1 fare for the historic Charlotte
Trolley, which starts daily service in February between uptown and the South
End. That's the current fare, but the CATS staff proposed setting it at $1.10, the
same as local bus fare.

The trolley fare will increase to $1.20 in 2006, the same fare planned for the
light-rail line, said Keith Parker, deputy director.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dianne Whitacre: (704) 358-5099; dwhitacre@charlotteobserver.com










PTP Digest 2003/10/24-A = CONTENTS

* Austin: GOP pol vets regional rail plan sans vote
   Austin American-Statesman  Friday, October 24, 2003

* LA: Transit strike sparks painful congestion jump
   Los Angeles Times October 23, 2003

* Houston-area Dem says: Vote Yes on Metro rail plan
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 23, 2003

* Houston: Rail foes using bogus 'FTA' numbers?
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 23, 2003

* Houston: Rail foes hit Metro 'info' insert as 'ethics' breach
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 23, 2003

* Seattle: 'Big victory for light rail'
   News Tribune - Tacoma  October 23rd, 2003

* Seattle: $500 million coming for LRT (with strings attached)
   Seattle Times Thursday, October 23, 2003

* Seattle monorail planners hit for 'cutting corners' with 1-track plan
   KIRO 7 Eyewitness News 2003/10/23

* Seattle: How monorail promoters bollixed revenue estimates
   Seattle Times Thursday, October 23, 2003

* Seattle: Another Councilman opposes monorail through Seattle Center
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Thursday, October 23, 2003



=PTP==================================================

http://www.statesman.com/metrostate/content/auto/epaper/editions/friday/metro_
state_f389fc0123bd424a00d7.html

Austin American-Statesman
Friday, October 24, 2003

Krusee pushes commuter rail plans

Suggestion that rail election might not be necessary in certain circumstances
draws chilly reaction

By Ben Wear


Rep. Mike Krusee, of late an enthusiastic flag bearer for bringing toll roads and
passenger rail to Central Texas, has raised the possibility of carrying legislation
to clear the way for a rail system without a public vote.

That suggestion, made in a private meeting of civic and transportation leaders
Monday at the Headliners Club, was radioactive in a community that has fought
about putting people on rail cars for more than a decade.

it moved Capital Metro Chairman Lee Walker to immediately assure participants
that he was not lobbying for such a thing. Walker went on to tell the
approximately 25 mayors, city managers, transportation officials, developers and
environmentalists that his guess is that an election on passenger rail is likely in
November 2004.

Although he clearly favors passenger rail, Walker had not previously gone on the
record pinpointing next November for such an election. And Krusee, not so long
ago a legislative thorn in Capital Metro's much-pierced side, had never raised the
possibility of easing off on the election requirement.

On Thursday, Krusee, R-Round Rock, backed up, saying he could see
introducing such legislation in a possible special session next year only if there
were overwhelming public consensus for a system.

What Krusee is talking about, along with Walker and a growing number of
community leaders across the political spectrum, is so-called commuter rail, a
system that would use existing freight railroads and railroad right of way.

"We're not going to obviate the need for an election on light rail, I can tell you
that," said Krusee.

in the 2001 legislative session, Krusee successfully carried a bill requiring
Capital Metro to hold elections on rail only in Novembers of even-numbered
years. The point was to prevent the transit agency from holding an election when
voter turnout would be lower and thus easier to manipulate. The previous
November, voters narrowly rejected the creation of a 52-mile system of light rail,
trolley-like cars that in some cases would have run on tracks embedded in
existing city streets.

Krusee said haggling over whether or not to hold an election is exactly the sort of
divisive issue he's trying to outflank. He convened the Monday meeting in
downtown Austin to gather consensus.

Krusee outlined a possible passenger rail system of more than 100 miles that
would use an existing Capital Metro freight rail line from Leander to downtown
Austin, a freight line that runs from beyond Georgetown to points south of San
Marcos, and a possible third line that would have to be built from scratch on an
existing rail right of way east of Round Rock and Austin.

Such a system would be cheaper to build on a per-mile basis than light rail.
Krusee has suggested the tab might be in the hundreds of millions for the 100-
plus mile system he has in mind; the 52 miles of light rail would have cost $1.9
billion. But light-rail advocates say commuter rail would serve suburbanites,
primarily, rather than the urbanites they say are most drawn to alternative forms
of transportation. And those generally opposed to spending big sums on rail
won't necessarily be mollified.

"There are a couple of questions I would want answered first," said Travis
County Commissioner Gerald Daugherty, who has fought for years to lower
Capital Metro's 1-cent sales tax. "One, would Capital Metro operate all of it? And
two, would it necessitate Capital Metro needing the entire penny sales tax? And
if those two things were true, I would fight it just as hard as I fought the light rail."

Daugherty was particularly disturbed to hear about the possibility of having no
public vote, and said he planned to "get into it" with Krusee on that subject.

Light-rail opponent Jim Skaggs, who worked closely with Daugherty on the 2000
election and was at the Monday meeting, is withholding judgment.

"I'm not about to throw rocks until I understand it," Skaggs said. "My initial
reaction is that there's some good in this, and some concerns."

Skaggs said he likely will join the elaborate field trip to the Washington, D.C.,
area that Krusee is organizing for November to look at the sort of developments
that might grow up around rail stations. Mike Polikov, a former Capital Metro
board member and a transportation consultant with Prime Strategies, said that
about 30 people have committed to make the trip. His company, along with
Capital Metro and other governments and private interests will finance the
outing's $15,000 to $20,000 cost.

And then?

"We'll take the trip, and then we'll get together again," Krusee said. "If everyone
is excited about what they see, then we'll probably expand the scope, including
some county judges and maybe more legislators."

Austin Mayor Will Wynn, who attended Krusee's soiree, is already on board,
even without the field trip.

"I will be a big supporter of a growing commuter rail system for Austin and
Central Texas," Wynn said in an e-mail. "And I'm not scared of an election. The
cost/benefit analysis will be obvious. The bumper sticker will probably read: Does
too much, costs too little."

bwear@statesman.com; 445-3698



=PTP==============================================

[PTP NOTE:  So, transit ridership is such an insignificant percentage of total
travel, it doesn't have any impact on traffic flow and congestion?]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-
traffic23oct23,1,6354904,print.story?coll=la-home-todays-times


Los Angeles Times
October 23, 2003

Strike Clogs Traffic Even More

Studies find more cars on the roads and an increase in rush-hour delays on
major L.A. freeways.

By Caitlin Liu and Joel Rubin
Times Staff Writers

Traffic on Los Angeles streets and freeways has increased since the transit
strike began 10 days ago, according to transportation records, significantly
worsening congestion and delays throughout the city.

A report by the Los Angeles Department of Transportation, which sampled 11
major intersections and freeway ramps for three days last week, found a 4.4%
jump in traffic volume overall, clogging roads from Westwood to Hollywood to
Woodland Hills.

Experts said even such a modest jump in traffic volume can cause major
problems on already congested streets.

"Just a 5% increase during our peak hours can send us into a tizzy," said Wayne
Tanda, general manager for the Transportation Department. "A few more cars
getting into a freeway can send it into total gridlock."

Motorists said the commute is getting worse by the day.

"it's absolutely terrible," said Brent Phillips, whose 45-minute morning drive from
Encino to downtown Los Angeles has doubled since MTA workers went on
strike. "From the moment I get onto the freeway until I get to work, it's like a
parking lot."

The 101 Freeway, which Phillips drives every day, appears to be especially hard
hit. The Hollywood Freeway portion of the 101 runs above the Red Line subway,
and the Ventura Freeway segment runs parallel to the Metro Rapid bus line.
Before the strike, the Red Line and Ventura Boulevard Metro Rapid buses
accounted for 70,000 daily trips.

Since the transit shutdown, the Hollywood Freeway's Highland Avenue exit in the
Cahuenga Pass registered a 4.5% increase in traffic volume, according to the
city report.

"Traffic is very easily disturbed. If you're near capacity ... a very small
disturbance is all you need to create a very serious traffic jam," said Asha
Weinstein, assistant professor of urban and regional planning at San Jose State
University. "If you add a small percentage of vehicles ... It can be just enough to
push you over the edge."

There are also signs that traffic is worsening as more transit users turn to
alternatives. Last Wednesday, the day after the Metropolitan Transportation
Authority's mechanics went on strike, citywide traffic grew by 3.7% compared
with the previous Wednesday. By Friday, traffic volumes were up by 5.9%,
according to the report.

A separate analysis of traffic data by the UC Berkeley institute of Transportation
found that commuters on major Los Angeles freeway corridors saw a 37.5%
increase in rush-hour delays since the start of the strike.

The analysis, performed for The Times, compared several weeks of Tuesday-to-
Thursday traffic patterns from freeways feeding into downtown, including
interstates 5, 10 and 110 as well as California 60 and U.S. 101. It measured
increases in commuter delays. A delay was defined as the extra time congestion
added to a normal drive when traffic is clear, said researcher Chao Chen, who
examined data from the institute's Freeway Performance Measurement System,
a project sponsored by the California Department of Transportation.

The study found that motorists on these routes suffered a total of 12,600 hours
of delays on an average day before the strike. But after the transit shutdown, the
cumulative delays grew to 17,300 hours a day.

The southbound 101 recorded the biggest increase in delays — 70%, according
to the Berkeley analysis.

Before the strike, transit trips accounted for at least 5% of all travel within Los
Angeles County, according to MTA's latest estimates. On an average weekday,
Angelenos took 580,000 trips by bus and 100,000 trips by rail.

By removing those riders from freeways and roads, the region's bus and train
network was saving the average resident 9.8 hours a year by reducing delays,
according to a 2003 study by the Texas Transportation institute.

Now, many riders are either driving again or paying someone to ferry them
around.

Since the strike began, ridership in franchised taxicabs has jumped 30%,
according to the Transportation Department report. Bandit taxis — or illegal car
or van service — also have been proliferating. Even when people carpool,
drivers typically travel extra miles to pick up and drop off passengers.

"The last strike [in 2000], it didn't appear this bad," said Jimmy Price, chief of
LADOT's parking enforcement and traffic control unit, after it took him 30
minutes to drive two blocks through the downtown's fashion district.

Holding up her white-gloved hands at the intersection of Figueroa and 6th streets
Wednesday afternoon, Traffic Officer April McCarthy said she senses growing
frustration among motorists. "Just two seconds ago, a guy drove by and flipped
me off!" she said. "But that's just part of the job."

"it's TMC — too many cars," added Rod Bernsen, a reporter for Fox 11 News .

Bernsen, who has surveyed the region's freeways from a helicopter in the sky
before and after the strike began, said the stop-and-go conditions and miles of
backups reminded him of traffic snarls on rainy days.

"There's a lot more congestion. It's noticeable," Bernsen said.

Motorists aren't the only ones unnerved by the increased traffic.

"it's gone pretty crazy, man," said Carlos Garcia, a bike messenger from East
Los Angeles. "When the strike started I was happy because the buses would be
gone, but then [the streets] were just packed with cars. It gets worse and worse
every day."



=PTP==================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 23, 2003

Viewpoints

Derailing Metro transit plan isn't an alternative

By U.S. REP. SHEILA JACKSON LEE

JUST over one century ago, in 1880, Houston, the powerhouse of Texas
business, had a population of only approximately 16,000 people, according to a
federal census. Since then, the metropolis has seen unprecedented growth to
become one of America's most populous cities. That's why we need a public
transportation system that is funded by the public and will be used by the public.

The greater Houston area is subdivided into six counties: Chambers, Fort Bend,
Harris, Liberty, Montgomery and Waller. Harris County proudly hosts the city of
Houston, and that is where the largest part of the population is concentrated. In
2000, approximately 3.5 million people lived in Harris County alone. Over the
next 20 years, the population of the Houston region will continue to grow. In fact,
the influx of more than 2 million additional people in Harris County and another
million in the surrounding counties is expected. With respect to transportation,
Houston and Harris County already experience serious problems. The imminent
increase in population will only exacerbate the problems and will have a negative
impact on the overall quality of life in the region. All forms of infrastructure
improvements must provide the solution.

Road and freeway improvements, as well as the construction of an enhanced
public transportation system, will alleviate the problems while generating
significant tax dollars. Statistically, Houstonians travel more miles per day than
there are miles between the Earth and the sun. The distance between the Earth
and the sun is about 93 million miles. Houstonians drive about 156 million miles
per day!

The Metropolitan Transit Authority has worked over the past two years to create
a long-range plan for mass transit in the Houston area called Metro Solutions.
Texas has a Transportation Code, and it is authorized to act in this field of local
government through Metro. Given the need for the service to be provided by
Metro's plan and the state's jurisdiction to implement a plan that has been
accepted by the public, why does the federal government and a member of the
House Appropriations Committee need to interfere with its progress?

This member has worked to hinder this highly beneficial transportation project for
quite some time. In fact, his amendment to the Transportation, Treasury, and
independent Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2004, also known as
H.R. 2989 and incorporated as Section 163, aimed directly at this project with
proposed restrictions that are both redundant and unnecessary. This member
introduced Section 163 under the guise of ensuring that the citizens in the transit
authority service area had an opportunity to voice their desires with respect to
the light-rail proposal. He took these measures despite his knowledge that the
Metro board has been diligently working with the community to establish
development plans that do not violate Texas law and despite the fact that
Chapter 451 of the Texas Transportation Code requires the referendum process
that will take place on Nov. 4.

Furthermore, his actions likely precipitated the issuance of an opinion by the
Federal Transit Administration's chief counsel as to the denial of funds for the
Advanced Transit Plan largely due to the redundant prohibitions of Section 163.
Although Metro has called for a referendum pursuant to Chapter 451 of the
Texas Transportation Code, in addition to having held several public hearings on
the matter, the FTA, by way of this opinion, had summarily deemed the process
insufficient for purposes of the Section 163 prohibitions. Because neither H.R.
2989 nor Section 163 is law, the FTA opinion effectively disrupted and interfered
with the local administration of a transportation project that has been fully
accepted and supported by members of the community.

in addition to the fact that the basis for this opinion was premature, i.e., the fact
that both Section 163 and H.R. 2989 are not law as yet, the Metro board held a
meeting to change the language of its referendum ballot for Nov. 4 to further
conform to these prohibitions that are not yet law. This ballot was then accepted
by the Department of Transportation for compliance with federal regulations.
Metro held 178 public and stakeholder meetings during its development of the
Metro Solutions plan between December 2001 and July 2003.

The alternative plan backed by Metro Solutions opponents and formulated by the
Houston-Galveston Area Council, the "100 Percent Solution" plan, is still in draft
form and has not yet had specific public involvement for the additional 5,000
lane-miles on top of the already planned 5,600 lane-miles. In terms of economic
benefits projected for Metro Solutions, between $130 million and $200 million per
year in regulatory costs will be saved to reduce pollution emissions.

The opponents of Metro Solutions offer the 100 Percent plan as an alternative.
However, it is not an alternative. First, unlike the Metro Solutions plan, the 100
Percent plan is an unfinished study and not a plan at all. Secondly, Metro
Solutions covers only a portion of the eight-county region, while the 100 Percent
plan contemplates the incorporation of the Regional Transportation Plan, or
RTP, which is a multimodal plan that covers the entire eight-county region. The
RTP is not an alternative to Metro Solutions -- it includes Metro Solutions. Also,
unlike Metro Solutions, the 100 Percent plan is based on a wish list of regional
road and transit projects that have no identified funding and would require
significant amounts of right of way. The claim by Metro Solutions opponents that
the 100 Percent Solution plan can reduce congestion depends upon the sudden
appearance of this wish list of projects that the federal government currently
prohibits local officials from planning and programming, as they have no existing
revenue streams to fund such projects.

in conclusion, there is no need to impede or to derail the Metro Solutions plan.
Houston is the only city in the United States that was affected by funding
restrictions of H.R. 2989. As a result, the city has been singled out and excluded
from the 25 slices of a funding pie worth $1.2 billion federal dollars. Dallas is
slated to receive $30 million under the act. The referendum vote on Nov. 4 will
translate to more needed rail, more buses and more roads with no new taxes.
Metro Solutions is a public transportation plan that will serve the public --
therefore, the will of the community should supersede any federal special
interests. I strongly urge a yes vote on the Metro referendum.

Jackson Lee, a Democrat, represents Houston's 18th Congressional District. She
is a member of the House Select Committee on Homeland Security and ranking
member of the House Subcommittee on immigration and Border Security of the
Judiciary Committee.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2176253



=PTP=============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 23, 2003

FTA denies it produced Metro shortfall figures

Budget criticism is key to anti-rail effort

By LUCAS WALL


The federal agency that distributes grants to Metro has denied ever confirming
numbers that purport to show the transit authority overestimated its future funds
by more than $100 million.

Republican officials including U.S. Rep. John Culberson of Houston and Harris
County Judge Robert Eckels released a chart last month prepared by the House
Appropriations Committee that compared the Metropolitan Transit Authority's
grants budget through 2009 to data marked "FTA Projections." The difference
between the two came to $116 million.

But in a Wednesday letter to U.S. Rep. Nick Lampson, D-Beaumont, the
administrator of the Federal Transit Administration wrote: "FTA did not produce
the chart or the figures included therein."

Although $116 million is a small fraction of the $7.5 billion Metro proposes to
spend in the next 22 years to expand the region's transit system, rail opponents
used the figure to denounce the authority's budgeting. For example, a mailer this
week from the anti-rail group Texans for True Mobility states, "U.S. Department
of Transportation Notifies Metro -- Your Numbers Are Off By Tens of Millions."

FTA Administrator Jennifer Dorn, whose agency is part of the Department of
Transportation, also stated in the letter Lampson released Thursday: "The chart
and its figures were never reviewed and confirmed by the FTA."

Metro and its supporters said they were ecstatic about the letter. Culberson and
other rail foes were baffled but said it doesn't change their view that the transit
authority lacks the money to complete the "Metro Solutions" plan it wants voters
to endorse in a Nov. 4 referendum. The plan includes 73 miles of rail, 44 new
bus routes, doubling HOV lanes, and $774 million of roadwork.

"There was never any confusion at Metro about the veracity of these numbers,"
said Metro Chairman Arthur Schechter. "I would hope this letter would end the
discussion with an apology to the agency. We knew it was just a bunch of
hogwash."

Schechter accused Culberson and his allies of "deliberately misleading the
public by ignoring the facts."

Culberson, stepping off a plane from Washington, said he was outraged by
Dorn's letter. He pointed to a Sept. 25 letter from Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla.,
indicating the House Appropriations Committee staff consulted with the FTA
when it prepared the chart of Metro's budget figures. Istook chairs the
appropriations subcommittee for transportation, which decides federal transit
funding.

"The chairman, I think, would be honest and accurate in telling me that the
numbers on that chart were confirmed by the FTA," said Culberson, who serves
on the subcommitee. "Chairman Istook has a reputation for impeccable honesty,
and it is a very bad idea for an agency under his jurisdiction to question his
honesty."

Istook, reached at his Oklahoma City residence Thursday evening, said he relied
on committee staff to answer Culberson's inquiry.

"If they say they consulted with FTA, you can believe they did," Istook said. "The
fact that the consultation might have happened without the FTA administrator's
personally being aware of it is not out of the order."

Istook said because he was not personally involved in drafting the chart, "I don't
know if the FTA was ever presented with the same material staff had or if they
were looking at two different sets of material. ... The fact that people might reach
different conclusions from the same set of data is nothing new under the sun."

Lampson wrote Dorn on Oct. 9, asking her to clarify the origin of the numbers in
the chart. He and other Democratic members of Congress who support Metro's
referendum have criticized Culberson, alleging the figures were way off.

"Hopefully this will put that to bed," Lampson said Thursday. "it's my hope that
we can get everybody, including Mr. Culberson, to back down from coming up
with projections that don't make any sense."

The transit authority has acknowledged there is a difference of $43 million
between its projections and the Bush administration's six-year transit funding
proposal, saying it's because of different rates used to calculate annual
increases in federal formula funds. This money is disbursed annually to transit
agencies based on factors such as population and ridership. Metro used 8
percent based on historic trends; the president's bill suggests 2 percent.

Metro said the rest of the discrepancy on the chart is due to the Appropriations
Committee failing to include $66 million in federal grants the transit authority
already has received plus a $7 million state clean-air grant.

The FTA has yet to verify whether Metro has the $66 million in unspent grants,
despite numerous requests in the past three weeks from Culberson and the
Houston Chronicle. FTA spokeswoman Kristi Clemens did not return calls
Thursday.

Culberson expressed frustration that the agency responded to Lampson, a
minority party member, before it addressed the questions he and the newspaper
have asked since Oct. 6 -- three days before Lampson sent his letter.

"We have agencies responsible for overseeing monumental public works
projects like transit who can't give me simple answers to simple questions within
three weeks," Culberson said. "The taxpayers deserve accuracy and honesty in
the fundamental revenue numbers that determine whether the transit authority
can pay back the bondholders and build all the things it promises."

Eckels said it remains clear there is some shortfall in Metro's federal revenue
projections.

Metro's referendum asks voters to authorize $640 million in bonds to accelerate
construction of the next 22 rail miles. The transit authority needs matching funds
from the federal government to afford its new rail lines.

Lampson said Thursday's development makes it clear Metro can afford its plan,
which he called reasonable and essential for the city's future.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2176223



=PTP==============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 23, 2003


Anti-rail group cries foul on flier

Metro advertisement inserted in water bill called improper

By LUCAS WALL


An anti-rail group under criminal investigation for failing to disclose its
contributors threw a punch back Thursday, claiming a Metro flier distributed with
city water bills improperly influences voters to support the Nov. 4 transit plan.

"The city of Houston has no business doing political mail-outs," said Edd
Hendee, treasurer for Texans for True Mobility. "They are in the business of
putting water bills out, not to take sides on an issue such as this."

The Metro insert announces 19 public meetings on the agency's transit plan,
informs water customers about the Nov. 4 referendum on the plan, and lists
details of the "Metro Solutions" package. The proposal offers "options,"
"accountability" and "affordability," the flier states.

Hendee suggested the one-page paper, with English on one side and Spanish
on the other, violates state ethics laws prohibiting a government agency from
campaigning for its referendum. The Metropolitan Transit Authority wants voters
to approve a $7.5 billion expansion plan for rail, buses and roads.

To even the score, Hendee said, Houston should permit TTM to hang an anti-
Metro banner atop City Hall.

"If we couldn't put that on City Hall, perhaps we could put our message on trash
trucks for the Solid Waste Division: 'Trash Metro's Plan on Nov. 4,' " he said.

Metro dismissed the criticism as ludicrous.

"This saved public money," said Metro Chairman Arthur Schechter. "We were
simply announcing meetings and inviting the public to find out the truth. ...

"Metro has an obligation to be sure the public is educated as to the plan because
it is important to the future of the community."

During a news conference Thursday, reporters pressed Hendee to reveal who
has donated money to fund TTM's attack ads, including a mail-out comparing
Metro's finances to bankrupt Enron and a TV ad stating the authority will "slash
bus service, hike fares, cut Park & Ride and cancel road projects" when it runs
out of money. TTM has designated those ads as "educational," not political, and
therefore not subject to disclosure requirements.

"People concerned with mobility in Houston" was the only description Hendee
would give of his donors.

The Harris County district attorney's office, responding to a complaint by the
Houston Chronicle, is investigating TTM's failure to file campaign finance reports.

Regarding the water bills, the transit authority asked the city if it could include
information as part of its "public education effort about its long-term mobility
plan," said Corey Ray, spokesman for Mayor Lee Brown.

"We believe this is very much a city issue, and citizens of Houston deserve to be
well informed on such issues," Ray said. "The insert does not advise anyone on
how to vote."

Metro printed the ads and paid the city $1,458 to insert them in water bill
envelopes. Hendee said it would cost his group $105,000 to mail out a similar
flier.

This isn't the first time Metro has paid the city to get out its message through
water bills -- there have been inserts promoting its commuter bus service, vans
for the disabled and summer activities for children.

The city limits bill advertisements to governmental agencies and nonprofit
institutions, Ray said. Other inserts have advertised the county's new electronic
voting system, encouraged blood donations and promoted CPR classes.

Chronicle reporter Kristen Mack contributed to this story.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2176247




=PTP===============================================

http://www.tribnet.com/news/local/story/4227543p-4239486c.html

News Tribune - Tacoma
October 23rd, 2003

Big victory for light rail

MATTHEW DALY; The Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Sound Transit's proposed light-rail line from Seattle to Tukwila
surged forward Wednesday as a key congressman withdrew his opposition.


Rep. Ernest Istook (R-Okla.) gave conditional approval to an agreement
authorizing $500 million in federal funding for the long-delayed rail line.


Istook, chairman of a House Appropriations subcommittee that has jurisdiction
over transportation projects, had objected to the proposed rail line for months.
Among other concerns, Istook worried about its reliance on what he called
uncertain local funding.


But in a letter to the Federal Transit Administration, released late Wednesday,
Istook said he would approve the project on several conditions, including a
pledge by the Sound Transit board that it will not seek additional federal funding
beyond the $500 million authorized by the FTA this summer.


Istook's support was crucial, because transit officials have said they can't build
light rail without the promise of federal dollars. Construction on the $2.5 billion
line from downtown Seattle to a site north of Sea-Tac Airport is expected to
begin in the next few months.


in his letter, Istook also sought reassurances from Sound Transit that potential
cost overruns on the project would not hurt other transit projects run by the three-
county agency. Istook's concerns mirrored those of Rep. Jennifer Dunn (R-
Bellevue), a friend and political ally who has publicly fretted that cost overruns on
the rail project could hurt other transportation projects in her eastern King County
district.


Sound Transit's board planned to take up the issues in Istook's letter at a
meeting today.


"We're encouraged," said agency spokesman Geoff Patrick.


Dunn, Istook and Rep. George Nethercutt (R-Spokane) visited the White House
on Tuesday - hours before Dunn left on a five-day trip to iraq - to talk about light
rail with Karl Rove, Bush's top political adviser. Danielle Holland, Dunn's
spokeswoman, said the meeting focused on the need for projects to relieve
congestion in Puget Sound metro areas.


Sound Transit was discussed, Holland said, but Dunn did not lobby against the
funding agreement announced this summer, as some Democrats have
speculated.


Holland denied that Dunn opposes Sound Transit, saying she merely wants to
ensure that taxpayers get the most value for their money and that other
transportation projects do not suffer because of the light-rail line.


On Wednesday, Dunn's office issued a statement praising Istook's action as "a
victory for taxpayers across Puget Sound."


Dunn said she was encouraged by the decision, which she said "will keep local
funds within the regions where they are collected in order to pay for projects that
indeed reduce congestion."


Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Belfair), a Sound Transit supporter, also hailed the decision,
calling it "a victory of the merits over politics."


Dicks praised the Bush administration for sticking with the project despite
opposition from fellow Republicans, and said Istook kept his word.


"He said if we could answer his questions, he'd approve this," Dicks said. "All the
things he asked us to do, we can do."



=PTP=============================================

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001772829_transit23m.html

Seattle Times
Thursday, October 23, 2003

Sound Transit's $500 million to come - with strings attached

By Alex Fryer
Seattle Times Washington bureau


WASHINGTON — The Oklahoma congressman holding up a $500 million
federal grant needed to launch construction of Sound Transit's light-rail project
yesterday dropped his objection, pending three conditions.

Rep. Ernest Istook's move all but clears the way for work to begin on the state's
largest public-works project, and was greeted with cautious optimism by Sound
Transit officials.

"We're not popping any corks around here, but it's a significant development and
we're excited," said Sound Transit Communication Director Ric ilgenfritz. "it's a
breakthrough."

The Sound Transit board will meet today to consider the latest developments.
But even light rail's staunchest opponents concede the agency has crossed a
critical threshold.

Without the federal grant, Sound Transit officials said they would be unable to
build light rail.

Istook's decision capped a frenzied couple of days in Washington, D.C., where
— in an unusual display of disharmony — the state's delegation lobbied for and
against the mass-transit project.

As chairman of a House Appropriations subcommittee, Istook, Republican, has
jurisdiction over transportation projects including Sound Transit, and his role has
been critical to the project.

in his letter yesterday to federal transportation officials, he outlined several
conditions: a commitment that Sound Transit will not tap into Eastside transit
funds to pay for cost overruns on the $2.44 billion project; a commitment that
Sound Transit will not ask for more than $500 million for the Seattle-to-Tukwila
route; and a requirement that Sound Transit make the necessary right-of-way
acquisitions in Tukwila before next October.

Last July, federal auditors noted the difficulty of building a bridge across the
Duwamish River. The proposed light-rail line would also cross over two railroad
lines and interstate 5 near the Boeing Access Road.

Istook said he also was concerned the proposed light-rail route costs too much
and does little to relieve congestion. And he wondered whether the project could
survive financially if the Washington state Supreme Court upholds initiative 776,
which would limit vehicle taxes and cut $703 million from Sound Transit's budget.

But it was too late to consider those issues now, Istook wrote.

Sound Transit has $94 million of pending construction bids that expire tomorrow.
It could not execute the bids without the federal grant agreement.

Agency officials estimated that taxpayers would be forced to pay tens of millions
of dollars in added costs if Sound Transit were forced to rebid the contracts.

However, Istook noted that Congress must approve all annual federal transit
spending, and Sound Transit shouldn't count on receiving its money without a
fight in the coming years.

"Nothing in this letter should be construed as guaranteeing that the pace of
annual appropriations for this project will match the pace currently desired," he
wrote.

The grant agreement lays out a schedule of annual payments to Sound Transit
that will total $500 million by 2009.

if it's signed, the president's budget will likely include $80 million for Seattle light
rail in each of the next three years, with the remainder coming in the following
years.

Rep. Jennifer Dunn, R-Bellevue, a critic of the project, is traveling in iraq, but her
office released a statement applauding Istook's decision to approve the
agreement — with the conditions.

Tim Eyman, who authored I-776, conceded that Istook's letter signaled a blow to
light-rail opponents. "Sound Transit has shown a complete disregard for
plummeting public support for the light-rail boondoggle and will likely proceed no
matter what."

Former Metropolitan King County Councilwoman Maggie Fimia of Citizens for
Effective Transportation Alternatives (CETA), a light-rail opposition group, called
Istook's letter "very premature," and said she was surprised he hadn't waited until
after the state Supreme Court rules on I-776.

On Capitol Hill this week, supporters and opponents of Sound Transit, including
Istook, sparred behind closed doors.

On Tuesday, Dunn and Istook met at the White House with President Bush's
political adviser, Karl Rove. Rep. George Nethercutt, R-Spokane, also attended
the meeting.

Although Dunn's office said Sound Transit was not discussed, Rep. Norm Dicks,
D-Bremerton, said he believed Dunn was trying to persuade the Bush
administration to drop its support for Sound Transit.

The federal Department of Transportation has rated Sound Transit "highly
recommended."

A light-rail booster, Dicks said he called officials at the White House and the
Department of Transportation to lobby on Sound Transit's behalf.

"I made sure they knew there was a difference of opinion in the delegation. i
talked to everybody in town," he said.

Dicks said he never anticipated Sound Transit would have such a difficult time in
Congress, or that the issue would pit members of the delegation against each
other.

"This was unprecedented in my 35 years here, this kind of fight in the delegation.
I never expected this in a million years," he said.

Another Sound Transit supporter, Sen. Patty Murray, said she was "really
pleased. I think this is good news for taxpayers and commuters in Washington
state."

She said she was not worried that Sound Transit will go through the wringer
every time its annual appropriation comes through Congress.

"At the end of the day, they will get the $500 million," she said.

Alex Fryer: 206-464-8124 or afryer@seattletimes.com. Reporter Eric Pryne
contributed to this report.




=PTP===============================================

http://www.kirotv.com/traffic/2574654/detail.html

KIRO 7 Eyewitness News
2003/10/23

Monorail Project Leaders Consider Significant Change

ESSEX PORTER

SEATTLE -- Looking to cut costs, the leaders of Seattle's Monorail project are
considering a dramatic change.

But critics accuse them of looking to cut corners in a way that will affect the
safety and reliability of the changes.

One monorail track or two? That is the question.

With money tight, one track is less expensive. But will the voters get what they
agreed to pay for?

Artist conceptions of the new monorail show trains running on two tracks, side by
side.

But that was before monorail tax collections began running 30 percent less than
expected.

Now monorail engineers are pursuing a single track solution.

"There's potential financial savings if we can get it to work across the West
Seattle Bridge," said Tom Weeks, Monorail Project Chair.

Using single tracks means the columns can be smaller and less expensive,
taking up less space and saving lots of money.

But critics question whether a single track system would be safe.

"The last thing you want to have is a single track monorail stuck on the West
Seattle Bridge," said Richard Borkowski of People for Modern Transit.

There would be double tracks at each station so oncoming trains could pass
each other.

Still, monorail critic Richard Borkowski sees a project getting away from its
promises to voters.

"This is kind of just I think maybe the beginning of the end for the monorail,"
Borkowski said. "The single track idea, like I said, I don't think this it's something
the voters would say that they voted for."

But at the Monorail Project, single-tracking much of the route is viewed as a
good solution to some sticky problems.

"We've said to our engineers we have a revenue problem, we have a design
problem, come back to us with creative solutions to both of these challenges and
it's really wonderful to see the great work that they are doing," said Weeks.

As the monorail moves to cut costs, another city council member has just moved
to increase them.

Richard Conlin says he'll oppose a route that cuts through the Seattle Center.

Project leaders say it will cost $16 million to go around.



=PTP===============================================

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001772730_monorail23m.html

Seattle Times
Thursday, October 23, 2003

Monorail errors led to shortfall

By Mike Lindblom and Justin Mayo
Seattle Times staff reporters


When tax revenues for the Seattle monorail came in one-third below projections
this summer, Seattle Monorail Project leaders blamed the problem on a lack of
reliable data from other agencies — namely, the state Department of Licensing
and Sound Transit.

But, despite the remarks by Executive Director Joel Horn and others, the
monorail officials also contributed to their own predicament by not thoroughly
investigating last year how much money could be raised by taxing cars in
Seattle.

Working on a fast track to reach the November ballot, a monorail-planning
agency called the "Elevated Transportation Co." overstated the potential revenue
for the $1.75 billion plan.

"I would say we didn't spend much time on this at all. We were relying on
experts," acknowledges Dick Falkenbury, who was on the monorail board at the
time. "We had such an extremely short timeline and there was real pressure not
to question things, and pressure to get things done 'on time and on budget.' That
became a mantra."

What went on the ballot was a plan for the 14-mile Green Line from Crown Hill to
West Seattle to be paid for by a tax on vehicles in the city. The tax rate would be
$140 for every $10,000 of vehicle value. The plan passed by 877 votes.

The classic explanation for megaprojects that get in trouble is that proponents
have overstated the benefits and understated the costs. The monorail saga adds
a new twist.

"Normally, there are tax experts who can analyze the tax," said Harvard
professor Alan Altshuler, one of several scholars who has written about the topic.
"It sounds like a unique way of getting into fiscal trouble."

Errors in estimating the revenue account for most of the monorail shortfall, while
unforeseen tax evasion — people registering their vehicles outside the city —
also plays a role.

Once the crisis came to light, the agency began dissecting state vehicle data,
recruited four of the state's top economists to review future predictions and
approved a $52,000 independent investigation.

There should have been a more serious effort before the election, said project
critic Geof Logan. The public "should demand that the hard questions be asked
in the first place," he said. "The monorail had no detailed plan on the ballot
before the voters. They still don't."




But Tom Weeks, monorail board chairman, defends the planning work. "I think
we did a good and thorough job," he said, noting that two different consultants
studied the tax last year.

At a meeting this morning, a monorail committee is expected to release the
results of the independent inquiry, by Cambridge Systematics of Oakland.
Monorail officials have been forthcoming about the details, said Christopher
Wornum of Cambridge.

Those officials include Daniel Malarkey, now monorail finance director. Last year
he estimated the value of Seattle's taxable vehicles — the so-called "tax base"
— at $4.5 billion to $4.7 billion, but revenues are coming in as if the base were
around $3.2 billion.

Here is a Seattle Times look at what contributed to the shortfall.

Limited study for big decision


On May 29, 2002, the all-volunteer monorail board voted for the annual tax rate
of 1.4 percent. The agency based the decision on a three-page paper issued in
April by Berk & Associates, a local consulting firm. It compared a flat $100 fee on
car tabs with a 1 percent tax rate.

A Berk economist, Michael Hodgins, recalled that the paper was meant to be just
one piece of planning with the understanding that more work would be needed.

Stuart Rolfe, a former monorail board member, recalls being focused on
scrutinizing the cost to build the monorail, while assuming that the staff would
produce solid tax information.

"I spent most of my time trying to be sure we were as conservative as possible in
those (cost) estimates. On the revenue side, there was not the opportunity to do
that. ... "

Would it be enough?


"There is some possibility that the 1.4 percent may not be enough to cover the
full project implementation," Horn said in a June 28, 2002, message.

Ed Stone, monorail-outreach coordinator last year, recalls a meeting where
Harold Robertson, then executive director of Elevated Transportation Co.,
wondered if the rate needed to be increased to 1.5 percent. Stone needed to
know because he was about to publish a citywide mailing stating the 1.4 percent
rate.

Horn reported that commercial vehicles weren't counted in earlier estimates but
would be lucrative enough for the 1.4 percent rate to work, recalls Stone.

"Had we understood the tax base fully, we would have gone for a higher
percentage rate to make sure the plan was fully funded," former board member
Craig Norsen said yesterday.

A team from the financial firm of Goldman Sachs believed the car-tab tax was a
strong revenue source, less subject to downturns than sales taxes. But the team
cautioned in a July memo that no other huge bond issue relied entirely on a
vehicle-excise tax.

To keep the financing more flexible, the Goldman team suggested in an e-mail to
monorail officials that there be no sunset clause on the tax. The plan reached the
ballot without a 25- or 30-year expiration date on the tax.

Would new cars be taxed?


The monorail board tried to tax new cars, but late in the 2002 legislative session
an amendment supported by auto dealers said taxes would be collected "at
relicensing." That meant no tax at the time of purchase.

Berk, the consulting firm, listed the potential tax base in April at $5.3 billion with
new cars, $4.3 billion without. Monorail staff members cited $5.3 billion in
spreadsheets produced in May and June.

Malarkey told the Licensing Department on June 27: "This issue is extremely
important as it affects the tax rate needed to support the proposed project."

The state Department of Licensing determined new cars were exempt until they
were a year old.

Rolfe said he and several board members weren't aware of the new-car
exemption in May but knew about it by the time they passed a monorail plan for
the public on Aug. 5. The plan did not say that new cars would not be taxed.

Malarkey published a tax-base estimate of $4.7 billion. He said he added 5
percent to Berk's number to include commercial vehicles, updated the numbers
to account for recent growth, then subtracted 12 percent for the new-car
exclusion. Mike Evans, a state economist with the Licensing Department, said
recently that new cars are actually a bigger factor, because they are so much
more valuable than used cars.

Malarkey and Berk both relied on historic Sound Transit revenue totals that
wrongly counted some suburban cars as in the city of Seattle. The mistake was
discovered by Sound Transit in late 2001 and fixed by the Licensing Department
in June 2002, but nobody alerted Malarkey.

Weeks, the chairman, said the internal questioning shows monorail leaders took
the tax-rate concerns seriously. He said that his belief by August was that the 1.4
percent rate would cover costs even without the new cars.

Potential bond marketers accepted the numbers — one firm assumed a $5
billion tax base as a starting point in its proposal to sell $1 billion in bonds by
January 2003 — but might have found the flaws had they proceeded to a pre-
sale investigation.

Raw vehicle data not studied


Malarkey received a database of vehicle values from the state, which was not
examined in detail.

The Seattle Times, using July 2002 data obtained through a public-records
request to the Licensing Department, found that a tally of nearly all vehicles in
Seattle ZIP codes, including new cars, derived a tax base of $3.5 billion.

Berk's Hodgins and Malarkey both said that at the time it seemed more reliable
to derive the projections from Sound Transit's published collections. "That's a
real base, rather than making up something from scratch," Hodgins said.

But Sound Transit's tax calculation turned out to be wrong — for five years it
mistakenly included some vehicles from the south-end suburbs as Seattle cars,
causing a minor problem for that agency, which relies mainly on other taxes.

A look at the raw data would have displayed the ZIP codes of the car owners —
and might have alerted the monorail agency to a problem that today looms as an
obstacle to building the Green Line.

Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com



=PTP==========================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/145069_cbriefs23.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Thursday, October 23, 2003

Conlin: Send monorail around Seattle Center

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER STAFF

The chairman of the City Council's transportation committee, Richard Conlin,
yesterday threw his support for running the planned monorail line around the
Seattle Center instead of through it.

Conlin also pressed the council to take the stance before monorail officials make
a preliminary recommendation next month.

Such a stance would be significant because the council must give the Seattle
Monorail Project permission to go through the center. Conlin joins council
President Peter Steinbrueck, who also opposes going through the center and
wants the council to say so.

However, several council members are sitting on the fence, and Steinbrueck
apparently does not have enough votes yet to call for a vote.

Proponents of going through the campus say the thousands of people passing
overhead would be good advertising for the center.

in addition, going around the center on Mercer Street would leave a whole in the
Experience Music Project, which was built around the current Monorail.

But Conlin sided with those who say the monorail would destroy the parklike feel
of the center, and busy Mercer Street is a more appropriate place for the line.








PTP Digest 2003/10/23-A = CONTENTS

* Houston Metro: 73 miles of rail doable by 2024 with more bonds
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 22, 2003

* Houston: Rail foes may be lawbreakers, but wait till vote's over
   Houston Chronicle  Oct. 23, 2003

* Houston: HOV ramp closure means bus detour for years
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 23, 2003

* Seattle: Istook OKs $500 million for LRT, with conditions
   KING 5 News Wednesday, October 22, 2003

* Seattle op-ed: 'is monorail ripe for recall?'
   Daily Journal of Commerce 10/20/2003

* Seattle: More on new hybrid bus fleet
   KING 5 News Tuesday, October 21, 2003

* Memphis ed: Light rail plan OK, but needs work
   Commercial Appeal (Memphis) Sunday October 19, 2003

* Sacramento: NIMBYs oppose, others back LRT airport extension
   Sacramento Bee Sunday, October 19, 2003

* SF-Bay Area: BART SFO ridership 'dismally low' - free parking eyed
   San Francisco Examiner Tuesday, October 21, 2003

* San Jose: Planned BART extension in trouble, hotly debated
   Morgan Hill Times Tuesday, October 21, 2003


=PTP============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 22, 2003

Metro: 73 miles of rail is doable

Plan hinges on bigger bond vote in 2009 or later

By LUCAS WALL


Metro released a budget this week showing it could complete its proposed 73-
mile rail expansion by 2024 if voters endorse a larger second bond issue later in
the decade.

For almost two months, debate has focused on funding for a more modest rail
initiative -- a $640 million bond issue that will be on the Nov. 4 ballot. Critics have
attacked that proposal because it will pay for only 22 miles inside Loop 610.

With less than two weeks before the election, Metropolitan Transit Authority
officials now are promising that their entire rail system, including many miles
outside the Loop, can be built in the next 21 years.

"We're doing everything we can to tell voters it's a 73-mile plan," said Metro
Chief Financial Officer Francis Britton, armed with a proposal dated Aug. 25
showing construction costs for the complete transit-expansion plan would top
$7.5 billion, including $5.8 billion for all 73 miles of rail -- 65 miles of light rail and
an 8-mile commuter spur to Fort Bend County. Also included is $979 million for
new bus routes and $774 million for additional roadwork.

Metro had previously floated a projection of $2.8 billion to construct 40 miles of
rail by 2019. That projection included asking voters for $340 million in bonds
around 2009. The Aug. 25 document would almost triple that future bond
proposal to complete the rail system by the plan's 2025 expiration.

Rail opponents, who have criticized Metro numerous times for what they believe
are faulty financial projections, said this development only proves their point.

Chris Begala, a spokesman for Texans for True Mobility, said he suspects this
week's clarification was issued because of criticism that the 40 miles of rail in the
construction phase now before voters barely extend beyond the Loop. TTM,
formed to oppose Metro's plan, contends the inner Loop rail lines won't reduce
traffic congestion.

Begala said the transit authority is making promises it can't afford.

"Metro has been like daddy at Christmas time, trying to give everybody
everything they want," Begala said. "But in reality, you can't."

Metro says its numbers aren't wishful thinking: if the Nov. 4 referendum is
passed and voters endorse $910 million in additional bonds toward the end of
this decade, the transit authority contends it could complete the system blueprint
laid out in its 2025 "Metro Solutions" plan.

Proposals for light rail lines to Bush intercontinental and Hobby airports, plus the
planned commuter train to Missouri City -- removed by the Metro board Aug. 12
to fund roads for five more years -- could be constructed by 2025 if a future
board decides to seek the greater second bond issue, Britton said.

This week's revelation follows months of wrangling over Metro's budget numbers,
which have changed dozens of times since the plan's first draft came out in April.

Metro's board added to the perplexity, voting five times on the Metro Solutions
proposition. On July 31, it approved a blueprint for 73 miles of rail. Aug. 12, it
added the road money and reduced the next phase of rail construction to 40
miles. Aug. 18, it approved ballot language for the Nov. 4 referendum that
included only $640 million in bonds, enough to fund 22 miles of rail. The ballot
language was then tweaked in votes Aug. 28 and Sept. 22.

Arthur Schechter, chairman of the board, said he understands how some people
could become confused over how much rail can be built by 2025. Metro's vision
remains that all 73 rail miles can be finished by 2025 if a future transit board
seeks to accelerate completion of the system, he said.

After the Aug. 18 vote to ask for a $640 million bond issue, Schechter said the
smaller bond amount only delayed the larger plan. Now he and other Metro
officials are trying to assure voters rail can extend well beyond the Loop by 2025.

Rail foes remain skeptical.

"To come out with this type of rhetoric two weeks before the election, it's just
another example of the confusion that Metro has been inducing and the
disingenuous way they've gone about this," Begala said. "It calls into question
once again their ability to fund this proposal."

Metro officials strongly disputed claims that they changed the financing plan right
before the election to try to placate rail supporters, some who believe the plan is
too small, or rail opponents such as Begala, who point out the next 40-mile rail
phase only serves the inner city.

Metro President and CEO Shirley DeLibero said her agency sent the 73-mile
financing plan to the Houston-Galveston Area Council last month. The HGAC is
the region's transportation planning agency. And Britton said the ballot language
and all documents Metro has issued explaining the plan clearly state it includes
73 miles. Anyone who thought all of those could not be built by 2025 have
misinterpreted the information, he said.

"This document that was approved has the 73 miles funded in it," Britton said. "it
always has."

in addition to $910 million more in bonds, voters would also have to approve
elimination of Metro's "general mobility" fund after 2014 if all proposed rail lines
are to be complete by 2025. The fund distributes 25 percent of the transit
authority's penny sales tax to Houston, Harris County, and 14 small cities for
road construction and maintenance. The more spent on roads, the less rail that
can be built.

Past proposals to eliminate general mobility -- including one made earlier this
year in a Metro Solutions draft -- met stiff political resistance from local officials
who fear they'd have to raise property taxes to make up for the lost cash.

Paul Mabry, spokesman for the pro-rail group Citizens for Public Transportation,
said one of the great parts of Metro Solutions is the ability for voters to decide
after the first six years whether rail construction should continue beyond the next
22 miles.

"The voters are the ultimate authority," Mabry said. "We are voting next month
on $640 million in bonds. What we vote on in the future is to be determined."


This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2174089



=PTP=================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 23, 2003

DA to probe opponents of rail plan

By ALAN BERNSTEIN

Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal says his staff will investigate
whether a group against Metro's light rail expansion plan is breaking the law by
refusing to disclose its campaign contributors.

But the public won't know the results of the probe until after the Nov. 4
referendum on a $640 million bond issue for the Metropolitan Transit Authority to
add light rail routes and expand other projects such as bus service.

"While an investigation will be conducted ... It has been my long-standing policy
to take no action that may influence an election before the election is held,"
Rosenthal said in a letter to Houston Chronicle lawyer Joel R. White.

The Chronicle two weeks ago asked Rosenthal to investigate after Texans for
True Mobility used TV commercials and mail to slam Metro's plan as ineffective
and too costly.

Under Texas election law, candidates and political committees must file forms
showing which individuals gave them money, and how much. The Chronicle
contended that the law covers Texans for True Mobility. Violation of the law, a
misdemeanor, carries maximum punishment of a $500 fine.

The Metro critics say they created a nonprofit corporation to educate the public
about transportation issues and the organization is not subject to the disclosure
rule.

"We are absolutely compliant with every letter and spirit of the law," group
spokesman Chris Begala said Wednesday.

Begala said the organization is not voluntarily identifying its contributors because
the donors want to preserve their right of free expression as a group rather than
as individuals who could be vulnerable to criticism from powerful institutions. He
listed Metro, the city and the Chronicle as examples of such institutions.

The contributors can include corporations and individuals.

Spokesmen for public interest groups such as Common Cause have called on
the group to disclose its contributors so the public will know who is behind the
campaign, and Chronicle editors said they asked for the criminal investigation
essentially for the same reason.

Rosenthal said he has assigned the case to his Public integrity Division.

He said he and his staff will not comment on the progress of the investigation.

in a similar case, the Travis County district attorney's office is investigating
whether the Texas Association of Business violated state law by using corporate
donations in a $2 million campaign for legislative candidates last year.

The group says its ads are protected by constitutional free speech rights, while
Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle says some corporate donations to
political campaigns are illegal to avoid a situation where "a corporation can
secretly buy an election."

Texans for True Mobility and the Texas Association of Business use the same
lawyer, former First Assistant State Attorney General Andy Taylor.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2174545




=PTP===================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 23, 2003

Closure of HOV ramp expected to last years

The Texas Department of Transportation has closed the entrance ramp to the
westbound U.S. 290 HOV lane from interstate 10.

Metro buses and carpools that use the lane face a detour of several years while
the interchange at I-10 and the West Loop is being rebuilt.

Traffic heading for the HOV lane must exit I-10 at Washington, turn right and
access the Northwest Transit Center from Old Katy Road. Signs direct vehicles
to the U.S. 290 HOV lane from the transit center.

Ken Connaughton, Metropolitan Transit Authority spokesman, said the shutdown
is not delaying bus schedules.



=PTP=================================================

http://www.king5.com/localnews/stories/NW_102203WABsoundtransitJK.2c28f2
d5.html

KING 5 News
Wednesday, October 22, 2003

$500 million Sound Transit grant released


SEATTLE - An Oklahoma congressman who had held up a $500 million federal
grant for Sound Transit indicated Wednesday that he would release the money,
but not before Sound Transit officials agreed to some conditions.

Rep. Ernest Istook outlined the three conditions in a letter sent to Rep. Jennifer
Dunn, a Republican representing the suburbs east of Seattle.

- Sound Transit must agree that the agency will not go back to the federal
government asking for more money.

- Sound transit must acquire a critical piece of land in Tukwila by next year.

- And the agency must guarantee that if it spends money on light rail, it will not
shortchange other areas in the Sound Transit taxing district.

A spokesman for Sound Transit said the agency would not immediately
comment. The agency's board will meet Thursday to take up the issue.

King County Councilman and Sound Transit Critic Rob McKenna, however,
predicted the agency would agree because it really had no choice.


[PHOTO]
Sound Transit
A Sound Transit Link light rail train is bathed in confetti at it's launch in August of
2003.


Sound Transit has said favorable contracts for work on the light rail system
would expire if it did not get the money soon. Some of those contracts expire at
the end of this week.

"These conditions mean that they have to stay within budget and they cannot
cover cost overruns by raiding money from the Eastside or Snohomish County or
by trying to get more money from the federal government," said King County
Councilman Rob McKenna, a Sound Transit critic.

McKenna, Dunn and others have long been concerned that if the light rail project
in Seattle costs more than anticipated, the agency will just take that money from
the communities that won't be served by light rail, but do pay the taxes.

The development is also just the latest in what has become a kind of political
gamesmanship between Sound Transit, Seattle political leaders and Dunn and
othe Sound Transit critics.

Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels this month threatened to hold up a project to
squeeze more lanes onto the interstate 90 bridge, which would benefit Eastside
residents.

U.S. Sen. Patty Murray said Istook's release of the money was great news and
would allow the agency to have a full grant agreement signed by the end of the
week.

"This is great news for the taxpayers and travelers in Puget Sound," Murray said.



=PTP===========================================

Daily Journal of Commerce
10/20/2003

is monorail ripe for recall?

Tim Wulf
Seattle


Given the massive overestimation of monorail tax revenue, dissolution of the
monorail will become a strong possibility in the coming year.


According to state law in the authority statute (RCW 35.95A.120) "The city
transportation (monorail) authority may be dissolved by a vote of the people
residing within the boundaries of the authority if the authority is faced with
significant financial problems." This error in estimated revenue certainly appears
to constitute a "significant financial problem."


Jeff Doyle, staff coordinator/senior legal counsel for the House Transportation
Committee, Washington State Legislature, offered the following: "One can argue
that the drop in forecasted revenues for the monorail represents a "significant
financial problem." The issue is whether such a petition is found to be valid by
the city prosecutor, Tom Carr.


Affecting this finding is whether revenue projections for the monorail are
sufficient to complete the plan approved by voters. The monorail argues that
attractive interest rates, built-in contingencies in the budget, value engineering
and future revenue growth will allow the planned system to go forward.


These arguments can be countered in that such a revenue shortfall will mean a
truncated system or one not built to the standards set forth or implied in the
voter-approved plan. The city prosecutor may choose to decide that question or
defer an answer until the environmental impact statement is completed and bids
are received for the design, build, operate and maintain (DBOM) contract. If
projected revenues are not sufficient to meet the DBOM bid price, that will
provide strong, if not conclusive evidence of serious financial problems. Another
tactic by the monorail "authority" may be to stretch the tax duration from 25 years
to 40 years. This should also sink the agency under an interpretation of
"significant financial problems."


Derailing the monorail will be a proper end to the manipulative strategies of the
agency. Withholding this error of tax revenue is only one of many issues now
being exposed. Even in the voting booth, the monorail agency strategically did
not include on the ballot the anticipated number of years we will pay the tax.
Don't kid yourself. Exercising only half the tax this first critical year was not
because they are such nice people. It was a clever ploy to lessen the impact of
this tax during this critical time when we can still say no.


Seattle never really had a chance to vote on alternative routes. The current route
was set in place by special interest groups. Yes, there were opportunities for
public opinion, but that is a long shot from a vote on alternatives. Building an
elevated train in front of personal and commercial property is bound to have an
endless string of lawsuits. Parking has also been ignored. Businesses close to
terminals will find regular customers may go elsewhere due to a lack of parking.


Seattle deserves better. We need to pursue this dissolution. We are in the
process of gathering e-mail addresses of those interested in signing a recall
petition. We may even do the entire process online. Please send your e-mail
address to: tkbawulf@aol.com.



=PTP=================================================

http://www.king5.com/localnews/stories/NW_102103BUBhybrid_buses_pugetso
undJM.24ed52aa.html

KING 5 News
Tuesday, October 21, 2003

Hybrid buses to roll out in metro Seattle area

Associated Press


SEATTLE - Less thick, black exhaust will spew from a new fleet of more than
200 diesel-electric hybrid buses the Puget Sound region's two biggest mass
transit agencies plan to roll out next year.

When the 60-foot articulated buses lurch into motion, they don't chug through
fuel. At low speeds, they run on a hybrid electric drive, which King County Metro
Transit expects will save 750,000 gallons of fuel and at least a half million dollars
a year.

"The reason you save so much fuel is that the bulk of what a bus does is starting
and stopping," said Matthew Kester, a spokesman for General Motors Corp.,
which manufactures the hybrid electric drive at a transmission plant in
indianapolis.


[PHOTO]
TriMet
A hybrid bus used by TriMet in Portland, Oregon.


As the bus speeds up, it uses a mix of electricity and diesel fuel. The diesel
engine, made by Caterpillar Inc., takes over once the bus reaches 20 or 25 mph,
Kester said Monday.

"Because you're not dumping all the fuel through this diesel engine to get this
bus moving, you're getting a 90 percent improvement on emissions (of soot,
hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide)," Kester said. "Plus you've improved fuel
economy by about 50 to 60 percent."

New Flyer, a Canadian bus manufacturer based in Winnepeg, Manitoba, makes
the buses.

King County signed orders for 213 buses last Friday, and Sound Transit, which
runs regional express buses in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties, bought 22
-- a combined investment of more than $150 million.

"Obviously it's a technology we're excited about because of the cleaner air, the
fuel savings and the maintenance savings," Sound Transit spokesman Lee
Somerstein said.

The first new hybrid buses are expected to hit the streets by next spring.

On Tuesday in Seattle, General Motors planned to show off the 60-foot model
King County Metro Transit tested out before its recent purchase.

Hybrid buses cost more up front -- about $645,000 apiece compared to
$445,000 for a standard diesel-powered bus, Metro Transit spokeswoman Linda
Thielke said.

But because they use less fuel, don't need their oil changed as often and are
easier to maintain, General Motors estimates that the county will recoup its costs
within about seven years.

Metro Transit bought its test model last year and put more than 40,000 miles on
it before deciding to buy the new fleet.

"It performed remarkably well," Thielke said, noting it had plenty of power
motoring up hills, ran quietly and required very little maintenance.

Sound Transit bought a 40-foot test model. "Our operations people just love it,"
Somerstein said. "They've had virtually no problems."

The hybrids will replace an aging fleet of dual-mode buses that run on overhead
electric wires while they pass through the downtown bus tunnel, then switch to
diesel outside the tunnel.

Because the new buses will have their own electricity supply, they'll no longer
rely on those overhead wires while inside the tunnel, making them easier to
maneuver.

Transit agencies in nine other cities are running pilot studies to test the new
hybrid bus technology. They are: Austin, Texas; Hartford, Conn.; Houston;
Minneapolis; Newark, N.J.; Orange County, Calif; Philadelphia; Portland, Ore.
and Salt Lake City.



=PTP==============================================

Commercial Appeal (Memphis)
Sunday October 19, 2003

Should Memphis get on board light rail?

Editorial

FINISHING THE Madison rail line $19 million under
budget might be just the thing to give trolley and
light-rail transportation a boost in Memphis. The
Memphis Area Transit Authority (MATA), which says its
part of the job will come in at $55 million, instead
of the $74 million originally expected, should be
congratulated for its success.


The imminent completion of the project should
stimulate a discussion of the future of trolley
service and light rail in Memphis. Consensus is needed
on what that future should be.

Expanding the city's modest system of antique trolleys
into an extensive, modern light-rail network would be
hard to justify on economic grounds alone. The
operating subsidy for a proposed extension of the
Memphis rail system from Midtown to Memphis
international Airport has been estimated at $8.9
million to $9.3 million annually.


A decision to expand this community's rail system
would depend on factors that relate to the economic
picture only indirectly. Some proponents favor light
rail for esthetic reasons. It has the potential, if
people use it, to improve the city's air quality and
reduce traffic congestion.


MATA projections, based on a demand-forecasting model
that includes land use and transportation network
information, predict 10,847 to 11,675 riders would use
the airport line daily by 2023. Tentatively scheduled
for completion by 2008, two alternative routes have
been proposed for the project, with a couple of
variations.


Extending the Madison rail line through Overton Square
and the Cooper-Young neighborhood and then south to
the airport would make better sense in the long term.
Both Overton Square and Cooper-Young are popular
destinations for entertainment, dining and shopping -
perhaps not living up to their full potential but both
holding great promise.


Because of the lengthy construction time required for
rail lines and the utilities that accompany them, the
Overton Square-Cooper-Young route has drawn strong
opposition, however, particularly among commercial
interests in those areas. A variation would address
that concern partially by bypassing the heart of
Cooper-Young.


There is less opposition to an alternative that would
extend the rail line south from Madison in the Medical
Center to Lamar, follow Lamar southeast to Airways,
then continue south to the airport along Airways and
Plough. That route would take the line through
blighted areas that could use economic stimulus. It
also has the advantage of being a mile shorter.


But it would be premature to make that choice now, or
perhaps even early next year, as William Hudson,
MATA's president and general manager, has suggested.
The community must first assess the value of extending
rail service that's now available only downtown but
will be expanded to Midtown next March.


The process must involve a heavy dose of community
involvement. A proposal to expand light-rail service
in Houston has turned into what the Houston Chronicle
calls a bitter partisan fight, with most Republican
officials against it and most Democratic officials
favoring it. An African-American ministers group also
is fighting the proposal because of fears it will lead
to cutbacks in bus service that will adversely affect
minority riders.


Moreover, the cost of building light-rail systems is
going up for local communities. Although federal
subsidies still can pay as much as 80 percent of the
cost of building such systems, belt tightening in
Washington has lowered expectations for most
communities to the 50-percent range. In some cases,
local taxpayers must provide the rest.


Light rail has much to offer Memphis; it could produce
significant benefits in the form of economic
development, improved air quality and reduced traffic
congestion. A careful analysis of those potential
benefits against the costs would help Memphians decide
whether to join the light-rail brigade.



=PTP==============================================

[BATN]

Sacramento Bee
Sunday, October 19, 2003

Light-rail worry in Natomas

Some fear a line to the airport would bring crime and change
area's 'mood.'

By Tony Bizjak
Bee Staff Writer


Looming over more than a few residents' heads in South Natomas these
days is this clouded question:


if a light-rail line is built through the heart of the neighborhood,
will it bring strangers and crime to residents' doorsteps?


Steve Grant, who lives a few doors from one possible route for a
light-rail line, says that is among his concerns. He sees light rail
as an "impersonal" conveyance that doesn't have a place in the
neighborhood.


"It will bring crime and change the whole mood of the neighborhood,"
he said.


Sacramento Regional Transit officials are expected to decide in the
coming months the route for a planned light-rail line from downtown
to Sacramento international Airport.


Several officials have said they are leaning toward building the line
along Truxel Road, the main thoroughfare through Grant's
neighborhood, so that it's situated close to residents who might use
it. Another proposal would locate the line along interstate 5.


Truxel-area resident Sean South, who works downtown, says he would
like to see the line in his neighborhood.


"I don't have the fears that some people have about some sort of bad
element coming to the community via light rail," South said. "I guess
it's possible. But if you want light rail to work, you have to make
it convenient to where people live."


in response to complaints that there has not been enough community
discussion about light rail, RT officials have scheduled a public
meeting for 6:30 p.m. Monday at the community center on Truxel Road.


One thing residents will not hear, however, is a definitive statement
on what light rail might mean for crime, safety, and property values
in the area.


There is "no simple answer," said Sacramento Police Lt. Mark Sakauye,
who heads RT's security force.


He and others at RT argue light rail and bus lines tend to reflect
problems inherent in a neighborhood rather than to bring new problems
in, and that those problems can be managed with good law enforcement.


Light rail, Sakauye noted, is not a good getaway vehicle.


"(A criminal is) not going to break into your house, take your TV,
then go wait at the station for a train."


However, RT officials acknowledge they have not formally studied the
effect of the light-rail system, now 16 years old, on crime or
property values. RT board member Dave Jones suggests the district
should commission such an analysis.


"People have concerns," Jones said. "Let's take a look at it."


A Bee review of national research, and interviews with public
officials, police and residents of Sacramento neighborhoods with
light-rail lines, offers a mixed picture. Generally, public transit
is associated with nuisance issues, such as noise and vandalism,
rather than major crime.


A 2002 study of Los Angeles' "Green Line," conducted by the UCLA
Urban Planning Department, concluded that "the transit line has not
had significant impacts on crime trends or crime dislocation in the
station neighborhoods, and has not transported crime from the inner
city to the suburbs."


An earlier UCLA study determined that "If there was crime in the
neighborhood, there was crime at the station," said statistician
Robin Liggett. "The biggest thing we found in terms of crime at the
station was in the park-and-ride lots -- where they should think
about design -- where most of it was auto thefts or thefts from
autos."


if RT builds the line on Truxel, it has plans for small park-and-ride
lots in South Natomas at West El Camino Avenue, Pebblestone Way and
San Juan Road, said the agency's Jo Noble.


Sacramento residents near existing light-rail lines offer varying
opinions about the impact on crime.


Heath Charamuga of the Rosemont Homeowners Association, called light
rail "a positive for Rosemont."


"I don't see that we have any crime issues with it whatsoever,"
Charamuga said. "The people who use it are from Rosemont. In fact,
our crime has decreased in the last five years, and property values
have increased."


RT officials, however, are building a soundwall in Rosemont because
the rail line runs behind back yards and has generated complaints
about noise.


Nearby, in College Greens, some residents say they believe the
combination of light rail, a probation office, a Social Security
office, liquor shops and a flea market has caused problems ranging
from panhandling to petty theft to home break-ins, most near the
shopping area along Folsom Boulevard.


"incidents are fairly close to Folsom, not deep into the
neighborhood," said neighborhood activist Annette Deglow. "People
will tell you light rail is part of the problem."


in east Sacramento, near 48th Street, some residents suspected a
string of residential break-ins might be related to light rail, but
Councilman Steve Cohn said RT police have not been able to make that
connection.


"We took some steps to better light the station, but there was
nothing traceable to someone using light rail," Cohn said.


Police and RT officials acknowledge they have had drug problems and
other crime issues at some stations, notably the 12th Street light-
rail station downtown.


in 1992, a college student was shot to death while sitting after dark
at the 23rd Street station; a 14-year-old who lived two blocks away
was convicted of the crime.


But RT police say they have had no complaints of crime on the new
south line, which opened last month between Meadowview and downtown.


RT officials say they soon will be enforcing a new ordinance that
prohibits anyone from loitering at a light-rail station without a
train ticket. They also say they will improve computer tracking of
crimes committed at light-rail stations.


The limited data RT has kept show most RT police arrests and
citations are for disorderly conduct and fare evasion.


Studies elsewhere also offer mixed results about how property values
are affected by light rail.


John Landis of the Department of City and Regional Planning at the
University of California, Berkeley, studied the issue in the 1990s
and says he thinks light rail doesn't really affect property
values "one way or the other."


However, a California State University, Fullerton, team this year
analyzed 41 studies of 15 light-rail systems nationwide, and found
both positive and negative effects on property values, although not
statistically significant in either direction.


Fullerton researcher Lee Cockerill said residences right next to
stations may see property values decline, while residences slightly
farther away but within walking distance could see increases.
Commercial properties adjacent to stations tend to see the largest
increases in value, he said.


Cockerill is among the researchers who say a lot depends on the
design of stations and how useful the light-rail system is overall.



The Bee's Tony Bizjak can be reached at (916) 321-1059 or
tbizjak@sacbee.com.



=PTP=========================================

[PTP NOTE:  Comments from the Bay Area Transportation News editor have
been retained for informational purposes.]

[BATN]

BART considers paring down Peninsula parking

SFO extension refuses to take off.

San Francisco Examiner
Tuesday, October 21, 2003

By Sara Zaske
Of The Examiner Staff
szaske@examiner.com


The holidays may bring the gift of discounted and free parking at
BART's Peninsula stations.


After waiting in vain for the economy to recover, transit officials
are searching for ways to boost patronage of the 8.7-mile line. Ticket
sales have remained dismally low despite hopes that the start of the
school year would bring new passengers -- and new revenue -- to the
extension.


Samtrans, which agreed to underwrite the extension's operations in
exchange for ticket and parking revenue, is close to surpassing a
previously agreed upon spending limit of $6 million.


Officials said it was unclear how exceeding that amount will impact
Samtrans' other bus and train services.


"It depends on how far above the $6 million we go," said spokesperson
Jaime Maltbie Kunz.


Total usage on the new BART line was at approximately 40 percent off
expectations throughout the summer, and September was no better. The
line logged 24,687 trips through Oct. 3, roughly 47 percent below the
predicted 46,646 riders.


The low ridership numbers spell big cash problems for Samtrans, and
the Peninsula agency is still negotiating with BART over the amount of
operations funding it must shoulder.


BART had previously told the Peninsula transit agency that $6 million
was the most it would need to spend this year. Since the extension
line opened on June 22, Samtrans has paid out $5.8 million.


Supervisor Mike Nevin, who sits on the board, said the $6 million
figure was not set in stone.


"I think there is some wiggle room there," he said. "it's not the end
of the world or the end of line. It was a conservative estimate of
what we were looking at. Not a concrete number that can't be looked
at."


[BATN: "Conservative" in such a context would customarily mean a
prudent upper limit.]


in the meantime, the two transit agencies have been discussing ways to
promote the line, and a radical change to the parking system is due
before the BART board of directors on Thursday.


The BART staff has proposed cutting parking fees in half, starting
December 1. If approved, daily parking would drop from $2 to $1.


Monthly unreserved parking would fall from $42 to $20 and reserved
parking would be pared down to $30 from $63. The discounts would only
apply to the newest stations on the line: South San Francisco, San
Bruno and Millbrae.


[BATN: Even if the parking lots on the extension filled as a result
of this proposal, this could attract perhaps 3,000 or so new riders
per day and maybe $2 million in additional annual revenue. Where will
the other 16,000 trips and the other millions of dollars missing from
the apparently unrealistic projections be found?]


There is also another proposal to possibly suspend all weekend parking
fees as of Nov. 15.


BART board president Pete Snyder said that the agency is willing to
work with Samtrans to do whatever is necessary to boost ridership.
However, neither Nevin nor Snyder want to touch ticket prices or
service levels, yet.


"We believe only way gain any success is maintain basic level of
service necessary operation," Snyder said.


[BATN: Reducing the level of service on this grossly underperforming
extension is the ONLY rational move. SamTrans is being billed by BART
to operate over 400 trains per day on the extension, meaning that the
average train is carrying fewer than 60 passengers, meaning that the
trains, which cost nearly $1,000 per hour to operate, are running 90%
empty. Each SamTrans-subsidized near-empty BART train burns operating
cash which could fund more productive bus or Caltrain services.]


Of the four new Peninsula stations, the airport stop is apparently the
only station that is doing well.


The Millbrae station is the most behind its expectations, with only
roughly 5,000 riders passing through its BART's electronic turnstiles
every month [BATN: presumably "every weekday" -- not "every month"].
BART had predicted three times that number.



=PTP================================================

[BATN]

Morgan Hill Times
Tuesday, October 21, 2003

BART bills put more trains in limbo

By Peter Crowley

is the planned Bay Area Rapid Transit line to San Jose realistic anymore?

That's the hard question Valley Transportation Authority Board members
are asking themselves in light of new revenue projections that VTA
staff say might break BART's back financially. Without a new revenue
source or a massive economic recovery, staff said the VTA can't borrow
enough to finish the project.


South Valley Supervisor Don Gage is pushing to freeze $170 million
earmarked for engineering the BART extension south from Fremont,
through San Jose to Santa Clara. He'd rather cut BART short at
Milpitas and see the money spent on other promised rail routes, like
light rail to eastern San Jose and improved Caltrain service to the
South Valley area.


Others, like San Jose Mayor Ron Gonzales, said Gage is overreacting
based on pessimistic, recession-based sales-tax revenue estimates and
warned that delaying the engineering would make the project unprepared
when future funds become available.


Gilroy Mayor and VTA Board member Tom Springer said the South Bay has
to build BART if it doesn't want jobs to flee. California is expected
to add 13 million people in the next 20 to 25 years, he said, and if
commuting to work in the Bay Area becomes a problem, industry may well
move these jobs to the Central Valley.


"If you kill BART, you practically guarantee that jobs go over to the
Central Valley," Springer said. Springer is on the VTA Board until
December, in a seat that rotates between Gilroy, Milpitas and Morgan
Hill.


On Aug. 7, VTA Board members voted 7-5 to include the BART engineering
fees in a $550 million bond.


REVENUE PROJECTIONS


Within the last few weeks, however, VTA staff have revised their
revenue projections. When voters overwhelmingly approved the sales tax
hike in 2000, it was at the peak of an unprecedented boom for the Bay
Area. Now, in the middle of a lengthy recession, the expectation of
nearly $6 billion from Measure A has dropped. The VTA is now using an
admittedly conservative estimate of less than $4 billion.


Building the BART extension -- let alone operating it -- is projected to
cost $4.6 billion to $6.5 billion, depending on how long it has to be
delayed. A quicker timetable would be cheaper, but the VTA then runs
into the cash-flow problem of not being able to borrow enough money.


Based on these forecasts, the VTA says it couldn't do what's expected
of it without more money.


And where would more money come from? There's been talk of another
half-cent sales tax hike for BART on the 2004 ballot, or extending the
current one farther. Taxing the problem into submission may be
problematic with voters, however, partly because the recession might
not have lifted in time for a 2004 vote and partly because there's
also talk of yet another half-cent sales tax to save existing VTA bus
and light-rail operations, which are running under a $100 million
annual deficit. Part of the board's August bond was to save the VTA
from a 20 percent service cut, the biggest in its history.


The voters' mandate in favor of BART, however, is still fresh in the
memory of Gonzales, a VTA Board member who gave the BART link its
initial push. According to spokesman David Vossbrink, "The mayor
remains firmly committed to the project" and believes recent, gloomy
sales-tax-revenue projections won't come to pass.


"it's not reasonable to expect that the current economic situation is
going to be the norm," Vossbrink said last week. "The voters have
always said that BART is a very important project."


Vossbrink said the mayor's staff still hopes to begin construction in
four years.


in an Oct. 1 memo, VTA Chief Financial Officer Scott Buhrer told board
members that "in the absence of a new revenue source or a substantial
improvement in the local economy, the board will need to prioritize
which projects to pursue because we simply cannot build both BART and
Downtown East Valley (light rail extension, which voters approved
along with BART in 2000) by 2013."


This prioritizing will probably take place when the VTA Board meets in
November, Gage said. BART, as proposed, is low on his priority list.


Gage would prefer to cut the BART extension short -- perhaps at
Milpitas, he said, with a light-rail extension link to San Jose. This
would likely cut BART costs in half, he said, since the project's most
expensive aspect is tunneling under downtown San Jose.


CUTTING BART


The VTA's Policy Advisory Board, however, decided on Oct. 6 that it
wanted the BART line through San Jose, even if it had to eliminate
several stations. Cost-cutting measures have been ordered by
Washington for those requesting federal funds, but the PAB decided not
to cut that deeply. It is, however, submitting the possibility of
cutting two of the seven proposed San Jose stations.


Higher than BART on Gage's priority list, and much less expensive, are
an extension of light rail to eastern San Jose and several
voter-approved Caltrain projects:


* double-track and triple-track the San Jose-to-Gilroy Caltrain line,
allowing 20 round-trip trains a day to Morgan Hill, San Martin and
Gilroy on weekdays instead of the current four.


* convert Caltrain to electric power, expected to make trains quieter,
cleaner and perhaps more efficient.


VTA staff estimated in 2001 that these Caltrain upgrades would cost
$325 million.


OPPOSITION


The BayRail Alliance, a grass-roots riders' advocacy group, has
opposed the BART plan from the beginning and still said it won't
justify its high price tag.


"is it all going to go to benefit commuters coming into the county
from other counties -- at the expense of the real transportation needs
we have here?" Alliance spokeswoman Margaret Okuzumi asked.


"Are (VTA Board members) still going to say, 'BART to San Jose is our
top priority,' or are they going to say, 'Wait a minute; the emperor
has no clothes?'" Okuzumi asked. "Even if they put every single penny
of Measure A toward building BART, ... even if they borrowed to the
gills and even with their somewhat optimistic assumptions (of state
and federal grants), they've shown through their own spreadsheets that
they can't do it. They need another revenue source. ... They can't
borrow enough to build BART within a reasonable time frame."


[BATN: See also a October 2, 2003, memo from the VTA CFO

("The end result of this was that the BART project would be completed
in FY 2026 and we were still unable to maintain a positive cash
flow"), a 4 September VTA spreadsheet

("2013 Ending Balance, Revenues less Expenditures, Negative $2,916,495,000")
and a graphical illustration of that spreadsheet
 ]







PTP Digest 2003/10/22-B = CONTENTS

* SF-BA: 78% of Caltrain riders have access to car
   Caltrain press release Friday, October 17, 2003

* Tucson op-ed: LRT plan is best way to shape city's future
   Tucson Citizen Tuesday, October 21, 2003

* Tucson op-ed: Chamber has problems with LRT plan
   Tucson Citizen  Wednesday, October 22, 2003

* Tucson: Pro-rail group responds to issues raised by Chamber
   CFASTS Website October 2003

* Seattle's Dunn pulls Istook, Bush, Rove into anti-transit huddle
   Seattle Times Wednesday, October 22, 2003

* Seattle ed: Monorail agency must stop 'creepy' intimidation
   Seattle Times Monday, October 20, 2003

* Seattle monorail: Cash-strapped agency eyes 1-track design
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, October 22, 2003

* Spokane: Rail could be 'catalyst for growth and development'
   Spokane Spokesman Review Tuesday, October 21, 2003

* Cincinnati letter assails appointment of 'idelologues' to SORTA board
   CINCINNATI POST October 21, 2003



=PTP===============================================

[PTP NOTE: Caltrain is a regional rail service in the San Francisco-San Jose-
Bay Area.]

[BATN]

Caltrain press release
Friday, October 17, 2003


Caltrain Riders are "Return Customers," Survey Shows


Caltrain riders are a railroad version of "frequent flyers," according
to the results of the latest passenger survey: nearly a third have
been riding for four-plus years, and more than half ride the train
five days a week.


Some 5,700 passengers completed Caltrain's annual survey earlier this
year. In a departure from past surveys which were used to gauge the
quality of Caltrain service, the 2003 survey was designed to give
Caltrain a better picture of who rides the train and what Caltrain can
do to make the service more attractive to existing and potential
riders.


More than 79 percent of riders are commuters, and the primary reasons
cited for taking the train were avoidance of traffic (20 percent of
all responses), better use of time and stress reduction (both 15
percent).


The most popular morning northbound boarding stations were San Jose
Diridon and Mountain View, both at 11 percent, and the most popular
"on" station for southbound riders was the San Francisco terminal, at
47 percent, followed by the 22nd Street station in San Francisco, at
13 percent.


Although 78 percent of all riders have access to cars, only 64 percent
of midday riders do. Nine percent of passengers bring a bike on board,
and another three percent use a bike for one leg of their trip.


Fifty-nine percent of riders are male and 47 percent are married. More
than half are between the ages of 25 and 44, and 38 percent have
college degrees, while 30 percent have post-graduate degrees.


One in five Caltrain passengers has a household income of $100,000 to
$149,999 per year. The vast majority (72 percent) do not have children
at home, 12 percent have only one child and 10 percent have two
children.


Many passengers added individual comments, which have been catalogued
and will help Caltrain to make adjustments as needed.


The most frequently requested improvement was express service,
mentioned on 10 percent of surveys returned with comments, and seven
percent of the comments were about the lack of weekend service, which
has been suspended until next spring because of track construction.


Thirty-two percent of passengers get their news from newspapers, 26
percent from television and 20 percent each from the radio and from
the internet.


Sixty-nine percent of passengers speak only English at home, while 31
percent speak another language instead of or in addition to
English. The highest percentage was Spanish (13 percent).



=PTP=================================================

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/index.php?page=opinion&story_id=102103b5_light
railyes

Tucson Citizen
Tuesday, October 21, 2003

Guest Opinion: Props. 200, 201 best way to shape city's future

STEPHEN FARLEY

Editor's note: This is the first of two Guest Opnion columns on Propositions 200
and 201, which will appear on the Nov. 4 city ballot. Tomorrow, John Dougherty,
director of governmental affairs at the Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of
Commerce, will explain why the group opposes the propositions.
Thanks to the work of hundreds of citizen volunteers and the signatures of
18,000 Tucson voters, we will finally have a transportation plan on the November
ballot that we can vote for.

We have the power to choose the kind of future we want for our community - a
future where the transportation system works for all of us, whether we drive, ride,
walk, bike or use a wheelchair.

Propositions 200 and 201 will restore balance to our unbalanced transportation
system throughout all areas of the city by:


Building and operating a bus system for the entire city (40 percent of the plan)
that will take us where we want to go, when we want to go there, with minimal
waiting times

Rebuilding our crumbling neighborhood streets (20 percent of the plan) to make
potholes a thing of the past

Dedicating significant funds for new sidewalks and bikeways (10 percent of the
plan) to connect the gaps in our current patchy pedestrian and bike network

Building and operating a 13-mile light rail system (22 percent of the plan) along
Broadway and South Sixth Avenue to connect major regional malls, the
University of Arizona, downtown, the South Side and East Side commuters while
providing a stress-free and dependable commute to ease congestion and boost
the economy

Building and operating a 47-mile bus rapid transit system to bring people to and
from all corners of the city efficiently and quickly

Building and operating the Old Pueblo Trolley extension, along with three other
downtown shuttles, to boost downtown revitalization efforts and enable Rio
Nuevo to fulfill its potential as an economic generator

Hiring new traffic enforcement police officers to crack down on dangerous drivers
and make the streets safe for everyone

Boosting VanTran paratransit service by nearly 40 percent and extending that
service to the Southeast Side for the first time.

All of these projects together will cost the average Tucson family less than $30
per year.
In  exchange, families will be able to save thousands of dollars each year by not
having to use our automobiles everywhere we go. We will also gain improved
access to jobs, medical care and shopping and we will prosper from an economy
boosted by a transportation system that works on many different levels.

Jobs by the thousands will be created in the construction, operation and
maintenance of the system as well as the new development that will be
encouraged in proximity to the transit corridors.

This is a visionary but practical plan for investment in our transportation
infrastructure. There's nothing radical or untested about any element of
Propositions 200 and 201. All projects are already called for in previously
adopted regional transportation plans and there is nothing in the initiative that
precludes future road work paid for from other funding sources.

Propositions 200 and 201 have been developed by grassroots citizen activists in
conjunction with local and national transportation experts through a nine-month
public outreach effort. The final plan was shaped by input from our
neighborhoods, businesses and government and was put on the ballot by the
signatures of more than 18,000 Tucson voters.

Many car-oriented Western cities, including Phoenix, have enacted similar plans
(including a light rail component) that had strong bipartisan support and big
boosters in the business community and the Chamber of Commerce. We are the
only major Western city that is not already aggressively pursuing a multimodal
transportation system that includes light rail.

Cities such as Albuquerque and El Paso that compete with us for attracting high-
wage businesses are already designing light rail systems and bragging about
them to prospective companies.

Why should Tucson's economy be left in the dust?

Some people have expressed concern that light rail construction would somehow
be more disruptive than a typical road widening. This is most assuredly not the
case, as construction will not require the takings of private property (unlike most
road widenings) and most work will happen in the road median with minimal lane
closures and no interference with right turns into businesses or homes. Recent
advances in construction techniques in Portland allowed crews to be in and out
of a three-block area in less than three weeks.

And once the rails are in the ground, we will never have to undergo construction
again to add capacity as we grow; we will simply add more trains. With road
widenings, the disruption is more widespread and hazardous to businesses and
when you need to add capacity, there's no choice but to widen the road again,
taking more property along the edges.

Some opponents say that they are against Propositions 200 and 201 because
they want to have a regional transportation agency with a new tax and a new
plan, not a city-based plan. This opposition seems insincere, given that these
same people enthusiastically supported last year's distinctly non-regional failed
city road tax.

But even so, any regional plan would need to have - at its heart in the City of
Tucson - a multimodal transportation system very much like Propositions 200
and 201. Officials from Marana, Oro Valley and other communities have
expressed their hope that these propositions pass so that they can link their
transit systems to ours.

in fact, the passage of Propositions 200 and 201 is the key to the future
achievement of a regional transportation system for Pima County. Why should
we wait until we have a new bureaucracy in place before we enact a system we
already know we need? We have needs that Propositions 200 and 201 will take
care of right now.

Propositions 200 and 201 won't solve all of our transportation problems. But it
will set us on a better path that will allow us to improve our quality of life as we
grow. Rather than becoming passive victims of car-based sprawl and its
unpleasant side-effects, we finally have the opportunity to join together to act
and take our future into our own hands.

Please, for ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren, vote yes on
Propositions 200 and 201.

Stephen Farley is creator of the Broadway Underpass historic murals and co-
chair of Citizens for a Sensible Transportation Solution. For more information,
see www.SaveTucson.org.



=PTP=================================================

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/index.php?page=opinion&story_id=102203b5_light
railno

Tucson Citizen
Wednesday, October 22, 2003

Guest Opinion: Chamber notes problems with Props. 200, 201

JOHN DOUGHERTY

Editor's note: This is the second of two Guest Opinion columns on Propositions
200 and 201, which will appear on the Nov. 4 city ballot. Yesterday, Stephen
Farley, co-chair of Citizens for a Sensible Transportation Solution, explained why
his group supports the propositions.
The Tucson Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce opposes the ill-conceived
transportation plan and corresponding light rail tax initiative that will be on the
Nov. 4 general election ballot as Propositions 200 and 201.

The chamber opposes the proposed transportation plan for five major reasons:


Few benefit: A full 68 percent of the proposed expenditures would be used for
mass transit, which would benefit less than 4 percent of our population. Currently
just 2.5 percent of our citizens use public transportation. Only 20 percent of
these new taxes would be spent on road maintenance.

No voice, no choice: The proposed plan turns over complete control and
responsibility for the administration of the initiative to the Tucson Department of
Transportation. This fundamental change in the Tucson City Charter would
effectively exclude the mayor and City Council, and by extension, all city voters,
from any decision-making process.

Tucson only: The proposed plan is too narrowly focused on urban Tucson and
does not address the dynamics in transportation patterns throughout the greater
metropolitan area. The chamber advocates instead for a comprehensive regional
transportation solution, which may include light rail, to meet the needs of all
citizens in the Tucson metropolitan area.

Skyrocketing subsidies: Expanding Tucson's public transit system according to
the proposed plan would result in skyrocketing subsidies required to keep it
running. In San Diego, for example, the light rail system is subsidized at a cost of
more than $7.50 per passenger trip. The chamber is concerned that the
proposed transportation plan would require Tucson to substantially increase its
current bus subsidy of $3.50 per passenger trip.

Unsecured funding: Tax increases would pay for only a fraction of the proposed
plan. The bulk of the funding would have to come from the federal government -
but without a comprehensive feasibility study and the necessary political clout in
Washington, those critical dollars are not guaranteed. In fact, federal funding for
similar projects has been reduced across the country.

Additionally, the Tucson Chamber Board of Directors raised the following specific
objections to the proposed plan:

Other local governments and transportation organizations were not consulted.

Proposed light rail route would leave county citizens unserviced.

Utility relocation concerns are not adequately funded.

Language contained in the City Charter change would preclude road expansion:
[Comprehensive Transportation initiative, Section 2 (b) (3)].

Cost and construction time estimates are woefully underestimated.

No alternative analysis report is in place to comply with federal funding rules.

Federal matching fund estimates are unknown.

Rail construction will impede traffic and business access on Broadway and Sixth
Avenue and will reduce overall street capacity.

Neighborhoods around proposed rail stations would be impacted (changes in
zoning, parking, etc.)

There are no "sunset" provisions to the tax increases.

John Dougherty is director of Governmental Affairs at the Tucson metropolitan
Chamber of Commerce. For more information about the chamber's opposition to
Propositions 200 and 201, contact Dougherty at 792-2250, ext. 127 or by e-mail
at jdougher@tucsonchamber.org.



=PTP===============================================

[PTP NOTE: The following material from the Citizens for a Sensible
Transportation Solution website responds to most of the issues raised in the
preceding op-ed from the Tucson Chamber of Commerce.]

http://www.savetucson.org/responses.htm

CFASTS Website
October 2003

CFASTS Response to the Press Release from the Tucson Chamber of
Commerce Opposing Propositions 200 and 201:

Pardon the somewhat atypical press release format (and atypical length) to
follow, but we believe it is most helpful to directly respond to the allegations
contained in the 9/10/03 press release from the Tucson Chamber regarding
Propositions 200 and 201.

Unfortunately, the Tucson Chamber seems to have decided to make itself
irrelevant in the world of economic development by opposing the Comprehensive
Transportation initiative for stated reasons that can be easily refuted.

Apparently, the Tucson Chamber has decided to ignore the lead offered by
scores of Chambers around the country, including Phoenix, Albuquerque, El
Paso, Dallas, Denver, Salt Lake City, Louisville, Charlotte and countless other
communities with whom we compete for the attraction of high-wage businesses.
These communities have endorsed and aggressively pursued true multi-modal
systems featuring buses, sidewalks, neighborhood street maintenance,
bikeways, bus rapid transit, light rail transit, and trolley lines. These communities
recognize that providing a full range of choices to citizens allows a community to
continue to grow without sacrificing their quality of life or their economy.

The Tucson Chamber, in opposing the visionary and practical Propositions 200
and 201, is not offering any alternative vision in return. In fact, they infer that
businesses in Tucson should not support any future transportation plan in this
cynical statement from President Jack Camper: "Businesses in Tucson have
heard too many transportation promises about how their lives will be made
better. They have been promised better but have received worse." This may
have in fact described Propositions 100 and 400, the City's road sales tax which
was defeated last May with 70% of the citizens voting no despite enthusiastic
endorsement by the Tucson Chamber.

Propositions 200 and 201 are nothing like that failed City plan. The
Comprehensive Transportation initiative was put together by local and national
experts in transportation, in response to the stated needs of the Tucson public,
and was placed on the ballot by the signatures of more than 18,000 registered
voters.

The proposition is funded by:

* a 3/10 of a cent increase in the City sales tax (30 cents on a $100 purchase, it
will cost the average household an extra $29 a year)

* a 4 cent increase in the City construction contracting sales tax (modeled on a
successful tax in place in Marana that offsets a loophole that deducts 35% from
the sales price of construction contracting before tax is assessed)

* increased revenues from increased ridership on the improved system (no
increase in fares is necessary)

The proposition spends:

* 40% of its funds on a vastly better bus system with hours extended from 5am-
midnight, an improvement named as the number-one transportation priority by
66% of voters who voted in the May 2002 election, according to a July 2002
survey by the Arizona Daily Star;

* 20% of its funds on neighborhood street maintenance, rebuilding 136 miles of
crumbling neighborhood streets in the first two years alone;

* 22% of its funds on a 13-mile Light Rail system, which has been a proven
success in 27 North American cities at attracting former car commuters and
boosting economic activity in the transit corridor;

* 10% of its funds on sidewalks and bikeways to connect the gaps in our
multimodal system;

* 6% of its funds on extending the Old Pueblo Trolley all the way to the Rio
Nuevo urban revitalization project west of I-10, plus 3 other downtown shuttle
lines, all operating every 10 minutes, seven days a week;

* 2% of its funds to hire 11 uniformed Tucson Police Officers to crack down on
dangerous drivers and improve safety.

As is obvious, this is not simply a "light rail initiative" as it is called by the
Chamber, which doesn't mention any other aspect of the plan except the light
rail. In fact, the light rail opening was intentionally pushed back to 2012 so that
we can immediately enact urgent needs like street maintenance and more buses
right up front, and allow us more time to obtain the 60% federal matching funds
to build the light rail system.

it is also important to point out that all costs (outside of those federal matching
funds for the capital costs of light rail)--capital, operating, financing and
maintenance--are completely paid for by this plan, without the need for additional
funds. There is even a 20% contingency built into the plan to account for
unforeseen circumstances.

Finally, enacting Propositions 200 and 201 is only a piece of our total
transportation picture. The props will not preclude additional road projects
(billions of dollars of which are already funded in Tucson over the next 20 years),
and will not preclude a future regional transportation authority, should the
citizens want that. Indeed, any future regional plan will necessarily include
elements similar to this plan within the City of Tucson as its regional heart. Why
should we wait until another bureaucratic structure is in place before we act?

Bearing in mind that Light Rail is only 22% of our total plan, below are the claims
made by the Tucson Chamber about light rail in their press release, followed by
our response:

CHAMBER: "It will cripple businesses along the proposed route... The Tucson
Chamber has 200 members along the Broadway portion of the train route alone.
Construction and reduced traffic capacity along Broadway could prove to be fatal
to them and their employees"

CFASTS: Road capacity will not be reduced along Broadway. Along most of
Broadway, there is a diamond lane for buses as the outside lane. Those lanes
will be moved to the center, next to the median, and dedicated to rail instead of
buses. Construction will take place in the center of the road, not at the edges,
and will thus not affect access to businesses. New rail construction techniques
get crews into and out of a three block area in three weeks, and will not tie up
more than two lanes in that small area for much time. Furthermore, once you
have the rails laid, you will never have to undergo construction again to add
passenger capacity-you simply run more trains. When you need to add capacity
to a road, you have no choice but to widen, and that involves much longer and
more disruptive construction schedules than rail projects, as we have seen all
over Tucson in recent years. If the Chamber is concerned about the effects of
transportation construction on businesses, they should look more closely at the
more widespread road widening projects.

And when you look at the increased property values, increased retail activity,
increased commercial occupancies, and increased jobs that spring up along rail
routes all over the country, the only real impact on businesses along the route
will be strongly positive. In fact, in other communities, businesses have taxed
themselves to help build the rail system in anticipation of the economic growth
created by rail.

CHAMBER: "The proposed construction tax hike to six percent will do nothing
but make it prohibitive for working families to buy their first home, or remodel a
kitchen, fix a leaky roof, or do any sort of home improvement. This plan adds
thousands of dollars to the cost of housing in Tucson."

CFASTS: We have an entire fact sheet dedicated to the debunking of this myth,
you can find a PDF file on our website at www.SaveTucson.org. In fact, this tax
is modeled on one that has been in place in Marana for the past two years, and
which has had no complaints from homebuilders, contractors, or homebuyers,
and is one of the reasons Marana has been able to continue to invest in its
infrastructure without encountering budget deficits.

This tax offsets a loophole only available to construction contracting in which the
sales price is discounted by 35% before tax is assessed-that means the tax on a
new house or addition is only 4.94%. This tax increase raises that to an effective
7.54%-about the same sales tax we pay on everything else. It does not apply to
the sales of existing homes, which make up the largest percentage of home
sales.

Even with Propositions 200 and 201 in place, and even assuming it is passed
through to the buyer (which it may not), the same house would still be cheaper in
Tucson than in Marana or any other location in Pima County. According to
SAHBA, the buyer of a median-price home ($175,000--hardly in range of most
working families) would pay an additional $3,500 in taxes, mortgaged out over 30
years, and deductible from federal taxes. That amounts to a miniscule amount
per month to receive a vastly improved transit system that could save working
families thousands of dollars per year in transportation costs.

CHAMBER: "Other local governments and transportation organizations were not
consulted"

CFASTS: All projects in Propositions 200 and 201 are included in the PAG Long-
Range Regional Transportation Plan for 2025. We spoke extensively with
officials from City of Tucson, PAG, Pima County, and even officials in Marana
and Oro Valley who are excited to plug into this catalytic Tucson transit system
with their own routes.

CHAMBER: "Proposed light rail route would leave County citizens unserved"

CFASTS: That assumes that no one from the County ever comes into the city to
work, shop, or play. The system includes 12 shaded & secure Park-N-Ride lots
at the edges to encourage people to drive to the lots and take comfortable,
efficient, high-speed transit to go the rest of the way. These will attract thousands
of County residents, and for those who would make the counter argument that
County resident should pay, they will be paying through the plan's reasonable
3/10 of a cent sales tax increase when they shop.

CHAMBER: "Utility relocation concerns are misrepresented by CFASTS and not
adequately funded."

CFASTS: Our cost estimates include the projected cost of relocating utilities that
are under the rails. This is a standard budget item in every Light Rail project.
Along most of South Sixth Avenue, the City of Tucson had the foresight to move
the utilities out of the way during the recent reconstruction of the street, in
anticipation of future light rail, as called for in the Broadway Corridor Study of the
late 1980s.

CHAMBER: "Language contained in the City Charter change would exclude road
expansion Section 2(b)(3)"

CFASTS: The language they refer to is actually in the ordinance, not the charter
amendment. The full language in question actually reads:

"(B) ROADS: THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SHALL BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE, IMPROVEMENT AND
CONSTRUCTION OF ALL CITY ROADS. IN CARRYING OUT ITS DUTIES
WITH RESPECT TO CITY ROADS, AT ALL TIMES, THE DEPARTMENT
SHALL:
(1) ENSURE THAT ALL ROADS ADEQUATELY SUPPORT A VARIETY OF
MODES OF TRANSPORTATION, INCLUDING AUTOMOBILES, MASS
TRANSIT, BICYCLES, AND PEDESTRIANS.
(2) PRESERVE THE CHARACTER AND INTEGRITY OF EXISTING
NEIGHBORHOODS.
(3) FULLY EXPLORE AND EMPLOY STRATEGIES OTHER THAN ROAD
WIDENING TO ADDRESS TRAFFIC CONGESTION.
(4) ENSURE THAT EACH ROAD PROJECT ADEQUATELY ACCOMMODATES
PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST NEEDS.
(5) ENSURE THAT EACH ROAD PROJECT ADEQUATELY ACCOMMODATES
TRANSIT NEEDS."

Section 2(b)(3) was added to avoid boondoggles like the arbitrary, destructive,
and expensive widening of Campbell Avenue between Grant and Elm, which
cost $10 million to add two lanes for a half mile and did nothing to improve the
traffic flow along Campbell. Had the Department of Transportation explored
transit alternatives, they could have added extra capacity without widening and
without endangering the businesses north of Grant along Campbell.

CHAMBER: "CFASTS cost and construction time estimates are woefully
underestimated"

CFASTS: This plan was vetted by national experts, including the former Western
Region director of the Federal Transit Administration, which doles out the federal
funds, and was pegged based on best estimates in Tucson at $37 million per
mile. And according to the US Government Accounting Office Report on Transit,
the standard cost estimate for Light Rail systems in the US is $34.8 million per
mile.

CHAMBER: "No alternatives analysis is in place to comply with FTA funding
rules"

CFASTS: The Alternatives Analysis (AA) was ordered by Mayor and Council in
December 2001. Its Request For Proposals will be sent out in October of this
year, according to Gary Oaks of the City DOT. The FTA does require an AA, but
it also requires a dedicated funding source in place to fund the future system
before you can apply for the funds. Propositions 200 and 201 will satisfy the
requirement, and once we have finished the AA, we will be able to submit our
request immediately. Alternatively, we will not be able to request funds, even if
we have the AA in hand, until we have the funding source in place.

CHAMBER: "CFASTS federal matching fund estimates are unknown"

CFASTS: We're not sure what they mean by this. We estimate that 60% of our
capital costs for Light Rail will come from the federal government. And while we
cannot be sure that we will obtain full funding, we can be certain of NOT
obtaining ANY funding if we do not apply.

CHAMBER: "Neighborhoods around proposed rail stations will be impacted
(changes in zoning, parking, crime, etc.)"

CFASTS: Neighborhoods will be impacted--positively! The federal funding
requires that we involve neighborhoods at every step of the way, and that their
input be pivotal in the final design. While one of the benefits of Light Rail is that
is can encourage more compact smart growth, neighborhoods can choose not to
change zoning in their area at all. Light rail is flexible enough to include small,
low-key neighborhood stations without parking or adjacent development where
appropriate, and larger, mixed-use developments where appropriate. This is the
first time we have heard the crime issue raised, and we hope it is not an indicator
of the Chamber's opinion of the type of people who ride transit. There is
absolutely no correlation between higher crime rates and light rail.

CHAMBER: "Proposed light rail route is within South Tucson city limits, which
would not be subjected to increased tax"

CFASTS: One mile out of the 13-mile route, and one station out of the 16
stations are in South Tucson. While the City of South Tucson will not collect the
taxes to fund the system, the residents of South Tucson do most of their
shopping in the surrounding City of Tucson, and thus will be paying the tax. It
would in fact cost more to route the system around South Tucson, costing us all
more in the end.

CHAMBER: "There are no "sunset" provisions to tax increases"

CFASTS: Because there is no "sunset" provision to our transportation needs.
Once we have built the system over the first twenty years of the plan, we will
continue to have the funding source in place to continue to operate the system
and build new projects to supplement the system based on our changing needs
in the year 2023. This is part of why we say that we all need to vote YES on
Propositions 200 and 201 for ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren it's
about time we invested in our future, instead of simply short-term fixes.

if we have left anything out, forgive us, if you have read the whole thing, thank
you. If you need more information, don't hesitate, to email, call, or visit our
website.




=PTP===============================================

Seattle Times
Wednesday, October 22, 2003

in key week for light rail, a meeting at White House

By Alex Fryer
Seattle Times Washington bureau


WASHINGTON — U.S. Rep. Jennifer Dunn, an Eastside Republican and
longtime critic of Sound Transit, traveled to the White House yesterday to speak
with President Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove.

Dunn, R-Bellevue, brought along Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., an influential
subcommittee chairman who is holding up a $500 million federal grant Sound
Transit needs to begin construction of its light-rail system. Also attending the
half-hour meeting was Rep. George Nethercutt, a Spokane Republican running
for U.S. Senate.

The four talked about the need to consider congestion relief in funding future
light-rail projects, said Dunn's spokeswoman Danielle Holland. Sound Transit's
stalled grant never came up, she said.

But the meeting's timing struck some observers as curious, and Sound Transit
supporters doubt the agency and its grant weren't discussed. "That's like saying
you read Playboy but don't look at the pictures. It's just not believable," said a
Democratic source.

Others suggested Rove may have been asked to reconsider the Bush
administration's support of funding for Sound Transit.

Dunn was on her way to iraq and could not be reached directly, and Nethercutt
declined to comment.

The White House meeting took place during a week when Congress may decide
the fate of the $2.44 billion light-rail project.

Istook formally disapproved the $500 million grant last month. Sound Transit
stands to lose favorable construction bids Friday unless he reverses his position.

Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Bremerton, a light-rail supporter, said Istook told him on the
House floor Monday night that a final decision on the grant would be made within
48 hours. Istook did not tell Dicks how he would rule, and his spokesperson did
not elaborate.

Sound Transit officials say the federal money is crucial to breaking ground on the
Seattle-to-Tukwila route. Without it, they say, the project will die.

Although Sound Transit faced a tough time in Congress, the Bush administration
has been one of its biggest supporters.

Bush included $75 million for light rail in his proposed 2004 budget, and the
federal Department of Transportation rated Sound Transit "highly
recommended."

Last May, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, a Bush appointee, said he
had no reservations about the project.

Mineta's department agreed to award the $500 million grant to Sound Transit in
July, but the deal had to pass through House and Senate transportation
subcommittees.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., ensured the grant moved smoothly through the
Senate, but it ran aground in Istook's House subcommittee.

Istook has a history of opposing light-rail projects, contending they don't pay for
themselves and don't relieve congestion.

On Sept. 10, he formally refused to sign off on Sound Transit's funding proposal,
and the grant has been in limbo ever since.

Among his concerns is the possible effect of initiative 776, the Tim Eyman-
sponsored measure that would cut about $703 million from Sound Transit's
budget.

i-776, which would cap vehicle tabs at $30, was ruled unconstitutional by a King
County Superior Court judge. It is on appeal at the state Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, Sound Transit says two construction bids worth $94 million will
terminate Friday. The bids originally expired Oct. 10, but Sound Transit won a
two-week extension.

if the contracts are voided, the agency must rebid the work, at a possible cost of
tens of millions of dollars and monthslong delays, according to Sound Transit.

"it's an important week, and we hope we can move forward. We're in a holding
pattern and keeping our fingers crossed," said Sound Transit Communications
Director Ric ilgenfritz.

Opponents, too, wish for a swift resolution to the Sound Transit saga.

Metropolitan King County Councilman Rob McKenna said light rail would provide
minimal benefits for the price, and he joins Dunn in her concern that Eastside
transit revenue could be tapped to pay for cost overruns.

"I would rather have congressional leaders make a decision this week," he said.
"Let's hear it one way or the other."


[SIDEBAR]

Report card
The report, one of six state reports being released today, is available online:
www.abanet.org/crimjust/juvjus/home.html



Alex Fryer: 206-464-8124 or afryer@seattletimes.com



=PTP===============================================

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorialsopinion/2001770088_monoed20.
html

Seattle Times
Monday, October 20, 2003

Fix monorail in Olympia, not at license counter


Editorial

Seattle monorail officials are trying to achieve through intimidation a change in
law that could not be accomplished by legislation.

Monorail officials have urged car-licensing agents to report to the Department of
Licensing suspected monorail tax evaders. The department then would give the
information to the Seattle Monorail Project, which claims it is merely collecting
information.

Targeting people who change licensing addresses to locations outside the city
limits - or those who admit they are licensing elsewhere to avoid the tax - is
creepy.

Monorail officials insist it is illegal for Seattle residents to register cars outside the
city to dodge the tax, but there is no specific penalty for doing so. The monorail
ought to clarify rules regarding licensing in a straightforward manner, via
legislation that requires the Department of Licensing to do so.

Monorail execs wanted the Legislature to close the loophole last session. The bill
passed the House, not the Senate.

The monorail now should do what every other group must do: Go back and try
again.

Enlisting licensing agents is a bluff, a bet people will be so spooked by list-
keeping they won't evade the tax.

Monorail tax revenues are coming in at two-thirds the amount anticipated.
People licensing cars at recreational and business addresses outside city limits
are part of the shortfall. Evasion hurts the monorail project, and monorail officials
have an interest in the information.

But using licensing sub-agents who work in neighborhoods to collect information
about their customers is lousy public relations. Licensing agents do not have to
rat on people. Monorail execs would do better to return to Olympia to shore up
the rules.



=PTP===============================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/144926_monorail22.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Wednesday, October 22, 2003

Monorail planners may have 1-track mind

By KERY MURAKAMi
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

Monorail planners have for months been trying to figure out how to gracefully fit a
structure with two shadow-casting tracks on top of sequoia-sized columns into
Seattle's neighborhoods.

Now they're considering having just one track.

Yesterday, Seattle's monorail authority unveiled the idea of building one track in
some areas, carrying trains running both north and south. The trains would pass
each other at stations, where there would still be separate tracks.

Joel Horn, executive director of the Seattle Monorail Project, said the one-track
idea would save money, but how much is not yet known. The project has to
come up with savings because it's on a collision course with trouble; the project's
car-tab tax is raising about 30 percent less than expected.

One concern about the 14-mile line from Ballard to West Seattle is what the
monorail might do to neighborhoods Rick Sundberg, an architect who serves on
the monorail board, said a single-track "would be a little more delicate coming
into the city."

Rather than two tracks spanning about 17 feet above streets, a single track and
an emergency walkway would be only about 4 or 5 feet across. Having to bear
less weight, the 3- to 4-foot-wide columns would be roughly the same size as, or
thinner than those holding up the current Seattle Center Monorail. The idea is
more complicated downtown. With trains having to wait for oncoming trains to
pass, and crowds of people getting on and off, Horn said the authority is unsure
if the trains could run every four or five minutes downtown, as currently planned,
on a single track.

Horn acknowledged the single-track idea could have other problems. The
authority is trying to figure out how much more the additional wear and tear on a
single track might cost throughout the years. And having only one track might
cause problems should a train break down.


P-I reporter Kery Murakami can be reached at 206-448-8131 or
kerymurakami@seattlepi.com


=PTP=============================================

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/pf.asp?date=102103&ID=s1427786&cat=secti
on.business


Spokane Spokesman Review
Tuesday, October 21, 2003

Spokane

Transit backers plan for growth

Amy Cannata - Staff writer

Rapid transit stations could be a catalyst for growth and development in the
Spokane Valley.

Spokane Regional Light Rail is holding a series of meetings this week to plan
how transit stations could influence economic development in Spokane Valley
and Liberty Lake.

Transit stations are proposed in both cities' cores.

A station proposed at the University City mall could help revitalize older Spokane
Valley commercial properties that have suffered as development has moved east
toward the Spokane Valley Mall.

Spokane Valley officials have been considering the area as a location for city
offices.

"it's very important that the development they propose not be dependent on
transit being there," light rail project manager Kim Traver said.

The light rail committee is studying the possibility of bus rapid transit.

A study this year showed there aren't enough potential riders to win federal
financing of a proposed 16-mile light rail line between downtown Spokane and
Liberty Lake.

With bus rapid transit, buses would be given priority at intersections, stop less
frequently and hold more passengers.

Another possibility is a shorter light rail line.

Bus or rail rapid transit could benefit University City, but current development
plans don't count on it, said Orville Barnes, the shopping mall's property
manager.

"We're looking at the fact that it will become a mixed-use type of area. We're
trying to position ourselves to do that sort of thing," Barnes said.

A portion of the mall is being torn down to make way for more surface parking.

The automobile still is king in the Spokane Valley, but transit could have a bigger
impact in future years, Barnes said.

"We're developing it in a manner that it could take advantage of that but also
work now," he said.


•Spokane Regional Light Rail will hold two public meetings this week to plan
development around proposed transit stations at the University City mall and in
Liberty Lake. The first meeting will be from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. Wednesday at
Decades at University City, 10502 E. Sprague. The Liberty Lake meeting will be
from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. Thursday at Telect, 2111 N. Molter Road.



=PTP============================================

[PTP NOTE: Dr. Haynes Goddard, Professor of  Economics at the University of
Cincinnati.  Dr. Goddard led the panel of  economists and financial experts that
oversaw the economic analysis of  transport investments at OKI over the past
three years.]


CINCINNATI POST
October 21, 2003

[Letter to the Editor]

Poor Choices for SORTA Board

To the editor of The Post:

The decision by the Hamilton County Commissioners on October 8 to appoint
two anti-transit ideologues to the SORTA board, with virtually no public
discussion, represents a significant abuse of governmental authority.

One of the new Board members, medical supply salesman Stephan Louis, is the
leader against regional efforts to bring balance to our regional
transportation infrastructure. He was recently found guilty by the Ohio
Elections Commission of attempting to affect the outcome of last
November's transit levy by falsely claiming that the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) had termed the region's transit plan among the worst
in the nation, when the FTA had made no such statement.

The other new SORTA board member is Daniel Peters, Chairman of the Board
of Directors of the Buckeye institute, a self-styled libertarian "think"
tank based in Columbus. A reading of this institute's publications on
transportation shows clearly that there is very little real thinking going
on there. In fact, the same week the editor of the Columbus Dispatch very
publicly banished the Buckeye institute from appearing in op-ed pieces
because they submitted plagiarized material as their own. This
intellectual dishonesty is not new at Buckeye, Ohio's very own purveyor of
junk science, the head of which the Commissioners have named to guide the
County's transit authority.

These ideologues were nominated by Hamilton County Commissioner John
Dowlin, who has very clearly demonstrated in many public meetings, both at OKI
and elsewhere, that he does not understand the investment analyses of
transport alternatives for our region conducted at OKI, and prefers to refer to his
"own set of facts", finding OKI's valid analyses to be inconvenient--not supporting
his preconceived conclusions. Even though OKI has obtained the services of
some of the best transport and economic consultants in nation, Dowlin
recommended to the OKI I-75 Committee at its vote two weeks ago that the
committee use Louis' unfounded and amateur conclusions in place of the work of
the consultants, even though Louis has no expertise nor training in the area.

Thanks to the efforts of several professional economists and financial
executives in the region, OKI has been able to elevate the quality of the
economic appraisal of transport projects to among the best in the nation,
all to no consequence, as local politicians like Dowlin routinely ignore
the findings. The citizens of the region are paying the costs of this
ideological blindness as our mobility in the region continues to deteriorate.

We have been very poorly served by the Hamilton County Commissioners on
these appointments. Those concerned about the economic future of the region
need to tell them to get educated.











PTP Digest 2003/10/22-A = CONTENTS

* Houston:  Under-40-somethings rally for rail plan
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 22, 2003

* Houston-area US rep: Vote No on Metro plan, back alternative
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 21, 2003

* Houston op-ed: Metro plan's a 'winning combination' of roads, rail, buses
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 21, 2003

* Calcutta eyes light metro
   TIMES OF INDIA [Calcutta] TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2003

* Portsmouth UK: Leaders urge govt. OK of LRT tram plan
   Hampshire County Council  17/10/2003

* Seattle: Diesel-electric buses may replace trolleys in tunnel
   Seattle Post-Intelligencer Tuesday, October 21, 2003

* Seattle: 235 new hybrid buses may lower op. costs
   New York Times October 21, 2003

* Newark Airport train/monorail connection gets mixed reviews
   News 12 New Jersey (10/20/03)

* New Orleans may suffer if Amtrak zapped
   New Orleans Times-Picayune Monday October 20, 2003

* Kuala Lumpur: Monorail builder touts progress
   KL Monorail [News Release] Dateline: 3/10/03

* Radio 'shock jocks' urge assaults on cyclists
   Chicago Tribune October 14, 2003


=PTP===========================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 22, 2003


Under-40 set drawn to rail, leaders say

By LUCAS WALL


A group of young professionals rallied Tuesday at City Hall, warning voters that
Houston will have trouble retaining and attracting talented workers if voters
refuse to authorize rail expansion Nov. 4.

Jason Presley, vice chairman of a young leaders group sponsored by the
Houston Downtown Alliance, said the city's traffic congestion, air pollution and
lack of a vibrant center make it an unappealing choice for many workers younger
than 40. The alliance is a nonprofit organization formed to promote a "vital and
vibrant" downtown.

"Houstonians are not fundamentally tied to our cars as others would have you
believe," Presley said to an audience of about 100 gathered on the east steps.
"The number of young Houstonians moving to cities like New York, Chicago and
San Francisco is proof of that. Houstonians drive because there is a lack of
viable alternate options."

Some gathered around the podium held signs with slogans including "Don't
Make Me Move to Dallas" and "Don't Make Me Move to Denver." Both of those
cities have light rail systems similar to the one the Metropolitan Transit Authority
has placed on next month's ballot.

Matt Harris, chair of the 700-member Emerging Leaders coalition, said young
people would see the most benefits from the long-term transit expansion that
Metro has mapped out. The Nov. 4 vote would authorize $640 million in bonds to
accelerate construction of the next 22 miles of light rail.

"This referendum is more than just a bond issue; it is a vote for the future," Harris
said.

Catherine Pernot of Houston Solutions, a group of young professionals that
educates others about quality-of-life issues, said Metro's plan offers choices for
those who don't want to live in the suburbs with two cars in the garage.

"If we want a healthy, long-term city, we need healthy, long-term transportation
options," she said. "It is time to diversify our transportation supply."

Three members of the Business Committee Against Rail held a protest at the
rally, holding up signs promoting more road construction. David Hutzelman, the
committee's 63-year-old director, said other cities such as Austin that do not
have light rail do just fine attracting young workers.

"Why would yuppies want to take twice as long to commute on a 15 mph trolley
while likely standing for rush-hour trips?" Hutzelman asked. "The answer is they
wouldn't."

Metro did not have statistics available Tuesday on how many 20- and 30-
somethings ride its buses. The American Public Transportation Association's
demographics of national transit riders are broken down only by minors, adults
and senior citizens.



http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2171903



=PTP===========================================

[PTP NOTE:  in the following op-ed, Houston-area US Rep. John Culberson
promotes the "100 Percent Solutions Plan" being developed by the Houston-
Galveston Area Council as a preferable alternative to the Metro Solutions plan
up for a vote next month.  However, the 'Houston Transportation Bulletin 3' of 13
October 2003 (previously posted to this list) had these observations on the
"100% Plan": "The METRO Solutions opposition cites the '100 Percent Solutions
Plan' being developed by the Houston-Galveston Area Council as an alternative
to METRO Solutions. However, the 100 Percent Solutions Plan not only includes
METRO Solutions, but includes an expanded version of METRO Solutions with
more rail and bus than in METRO¹s plan. The METRO Solutions transit plan is a
part of the 100 Percent Solution Plan that already has identified funding
sources...."]


Houston Chronicle
Oct. 21, 2003

Viewpoints

Choose the '100% Solution' over Metro's

By JOHN CULBERSON

METRO is asking voters to approve the single largest construction project in
Houston's history on Nov. 4, and every day raises new questions about its ability
to pay for it. As the only Texan on the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee
on Transportation, my job requires me to be involved whenever the Metropolitan
Transit Authority calls an election to build rail, or whenever the Texas
Department of Transportation or Harris County proposes a highway project,
because I am responsible for helping them obtain federal funding.

As a taxpayer, I am opposed to the rail plan. However, I have repeatedly pledged
to Metro and to the Chronicle that I will support federal funding for the plan if it is
approved. My personal position is that Houstonians can do far better than this
massive 73-mile rail plan that was hastily approved and, by Metro's own
admission, "might not reduce congestion." I am working with County Judge
Robert Eckels and the Houston-Galveston Area Council to develop a "100
Percent Solution" for all of our traffic problems.

The 100 Percent Solution will include many elements: commuter rail lines out to
the suburbs where our population growth is highest; more toll roads such as the
new Katy Toll Road to take the strain off of our highways, opening up more lanes
on key thoroughfares in the area, adding new roads to the system, as well as
diverting truck traffic from the Port of Houston around the city and shifting their
freight loads onto trains. Every element of the 100 Percent Solution will be
judged against the basic criteria: Does it reduce congestion; and does it improve
travel time? The 100 Percent Solution is almost ready, and we have the right
leadership in Harris County, Austin and Washington, D.C., to develop and
implement as much of it as we can afford. But first, we must oppose Metro's plan
because Metro will consume nearly half of all transportation dollars in Harris
County to carry only 1 percent of the traffic. We won't have enough money left
over for the 100 Percent Solution.

in any referendum election, the first place we need absolute honesty is the ballot
language. The ballot is the contract between the voters and the government. i
know from my experience in Austin that there are no state or federal minimum
guidelines for ballot language. The only restriction under Texas law is that the
ballot language cannot "mislead" the voters. So I worked with Metro in June and
July to develop acceptable guidelines for its November ballot language. Metro
actually wrote the first draft of my new minimum federal ballot requirements on
June 26. They watched these new requirements pass the subcommittee, the full
committee, survive an amendment to strike them and eventually pass the House.

The Metro board consciously decided to ignore these requirements and approve
vague ballot language that did not even spell out how many miles of rail it was
proposing to build. It knowingly created its "last-minute" ballot problem. On Aug.
19, the Chronicle reported that the final rail plan for the Nov. 4 ballot was "cut" by
"almost half" to "22 miles" in order to "appease foes." The impression given to
voters was that the referendum would be on 22 miles of rail at a cost of $640
million in bonds, when in fact, Metro was really asking voters to give their
blessing to a 73-mile rail system that will ultimately cost $7.8 billion. Metro finally
agreed to abide by these requirements and list the 73 miles on the ballot.

I was recently asked by Eckels to verify Metro's federal formula projections over
the life of the next transportation reauthorization bill (six years). I took Metro's
estimates to the Federal Transit Administration and asked it to figure out exactly
how much formula money Metro should expect to receive. FTA ran the numbers,
and I discovered that Metro was overestimating their projections by $116 million.
The numbers FTA used were based on President Bush's reauthorization
proposal, which assumes a 2 percent growth rate every year. Since the only
conceivable way to arrive at Metro's estimates would be to assume a massive
federal gas tax increase, and Bush has threatened to veto any bill with a gas tax
increase, Metro's numbers are obviously unrealistic. Even more troubling is the
fact that Metro has not even asked the loan officer at the bank, the FTA, what
level of funding to expect from the bank. FTA's revenue estimates mean that
Metro would not be able to build the rail it is asking us to approve, would not be
able to maintain its existing bus service without dramatic cuts, would not be able
to pay back the $640 million in bonds or would not be able to protect the 25
percent of the penny sales tax that goes to the cities without a tax increase.

Metro's only sources of revenue to pay for this rail plan are their one-cent sales
tax, federal funding, fare box money and whatever modest interest it earns on its
investments. Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt and
University of Houston economist Barton Smith have already concluded that
Metro's sales tax revenue projections are too high. Now with its federal formula
funding projections being called into question, I encourage every voter to take a
long, hard look at what Metro is selling and ask whether or not we can really
afford it.

The more closely I examine Metro's proposal, the clearer it becomes that my
duty to protect the integrity of the public treasury requires me to oppose this
particular rail plan. I know from my experience in the Texas Legislature and in
Congress that there is often a direct relationship between how bad a law is and
how big a hurry the authors are in to get it passed. Usually, the faster the law is
being rushed into effect, and the less you get to read in advance, and the harder
it is to get information from the authors, the worse the law will be on closer
inspection. The same is true of Metro's 73-mile rail plan.

Culberson, a Houston Republican, represents Texas' 7th U.S. Congressional
District, which is west Houston.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2171581



=PTP=================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 21, 2003

Viewpoints

A winning combination: highways, rail, buses

By U.S. REP. GENE GREEN

ON Nov. 4, Harris County voters will consider the Metro Solutions plan, which
includes 73 miles of light rail and a 50 percent expansion of the Metropolitan
Transit Authority's bus service. With traffic congestion the top local issue in our
area, I support approval of Metro Solutions. It will serve our district with light rail
by including East End and Northside.

Harris County residents will waste an average of 37 hours and 60 gallons of gas
each year in congested traffic, according to the Texas Transportation institute's
2003 Urban Mobility Report. Together, we lose $2.1 billion, every year, in
productivity and fuel. And congestion has been getting worse. In contrast, Metro
Solutions has $2.8 billion for light rail over six years.

Congestion impacts our air quality, and our Clean Air Act deadline is 2007.
Failure means lost jobs and lost federal highway funding. I am a co-sponsor of
legislation with Rep. Kevin Brady, R-The Woodlands, to protect area projects
already approved by the Environmental Protection Agency from cancellation, but
that is a Band-Aid, not a solution. Success means increasing highway and road
capacity, adding light rail and expanding bus service.

The nonpartisan Urban Mobility Report is clear: We cannot prevent congestion
from worsening by just building more highways. I certainly support highway
construction in our area, even in areas where it does not directly benefit my
constituents. Like U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, I support I-10
expansion, which is already $240 million over budget at $1.7 billion. But those of
us who represent areas served by light rail cannot continue to support suburban
projects such as I-10 West or the Grand Parkway without reciprocal help for our
communities.

We cannot bet the ranch on rail. Metro Solutions recognizes this and does not
raise taxes or take money from roads; it uses bonds backed by fares and federal
funding. Metro Solutions also increases bus service by 50 percent and 44 new
routes. Light rail is not opposed to highways or buses, and our congestion is
becoming so severe we need all available solutions. As each year passes
without action, congestion will continue

to increase.

Folks who do not often use public transportation wonder: What is in it for me?
But transportation is a regional problem, with congestion in one area quickly
backing up and spreading to others. We should not ask what will we ride
tomorrow, but what will the thousands of new Houstonians ride in 2007? Using
all means to reduce congestion in Harris County is the only way that all will
benefit. If we limit ourselves, congestion will increase for all.

Some respected local leaders, such as Culberson and Harris County Judge
Robert Eckels say Metro will go broke with Metro Solutions. But in fact, their
projections are based on a transportation bill, proposed by President Bush,
which they oppose, has not even been considered in Congress and no one
believes will pass Congress. In addition, Metro has reserve funds to cover much
of this phony discrepancy.

We can afford Metro Solutions, and get the best plan for expanding light rail and
bus service. But Metro doesn't build highways. For new and expanded area
highways, we must take two actions in Congress.

First, we must return more of the gas tax that Texans pay to Texas. I am a co-
sponsor of legislation with Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, to return
95 percent instead of the current 88 percent. Passage of this legislation is basic
fairness that will increase Texas share of the federal highway pie.

However, the federal gas tax does not keep pace with inflation. To allow for
more, faster highway construction the federal gas tax can be indexed to inflation,
as in the proposal by Republican Transportation Committee Chairman Don
Young. Federal gas tax revenues are not controlled by Congress and
automatically pay for transportation infrastructure. Although we might like to, it
will be nearly impossible to increase Texas' share of the highway pie in
Congress, without allowing the pie to grow with inflation.

if voters approve Metro Solutions and Congress acts sensibly, highways, light rail
and buses will be a win, win, win combination for Harris County.

Green, a Houston Democrat, represents Texas' 29th U.S. Congressional District.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2171519



=PTP=============================================

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=24389
1

TIMES OF INDIA [Calcutta]
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2003

Barasat to Joka in 90 minutes flat

SOUMYADIPTA BANERJEE


The one rupee that the state government is taking from you for every litre of fuel
that you buy, is all set to fund one of the most ambitious projects of the state
transport department.

According to sources in the department, at least nine private companies have
shown interest in this: a Rs 1,400-crore light railway transit project. It will be a
sophisticated version of Kolkata's trams that will link Joka and Barasat passing
through Kamalgazi in Garia, EM Bypass, Sector IV in Salt Lake and Dum Dum—
a distance of 50 kilometres which it is claimed will not take more than 90 minutes
to cover. No deadline, however, has yet been set for the completion of the
project.



"At least nine foreign companies have collected the project report from us. There
are some indian companies too. The project will be jointly funded by the
government and a private company on a Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT)
basis," said a senior official of the transport department.



Since the government has decided to regulate the fares for the new service, it is
thinking if offering some carrots will help the company recover its costs more
easily.



"No company will be able to recover the cost quickly as we will not let them
charge an astronomical transit fare. We might offer the company things like land
at a subsidised rate and infrastructural support at nominal costs to help them
out," the senior official added.



The state government had a round of talks with senior officials of the transport
planning directorate and the Calcutta Tram Company recently and the final
blueprint will soon be ready.



Senior officials confirmed that the project is in its last leg of planning. A
confirmed report is expected by 2004. "The tram is supposed to run on
electricity. It will have six coaches and will run at the speed of the Metro. It will
not have overhead hi-tension wires and might draw electricity from a third rail.
The train tracks will be laid on a higher level than the surface to make it safer,"
said B.K. Sadhu, chief engineer, Transportation, Planning and Traffic
Engineering Directorate.



soumyadipta.banerjee@timesgroup.com




=PTP================================================

http://www.hants.gov.uk/press/2003/PR585.html

Hampshire County Council
17/10/2003

HURRY UP AND MAKE DECISION URGE TRAM PROMOTERS

Hampshire County Council and Portsmouth City Council, promoters of the tram
scheme aimed at tackling severe congestion in the South's most heavily
populated area outside London want the Government to make a decision as
quickly as possible to end their anxious wait.

it's now three months since the two councils met transport ministers to leave the
Government in no doubt about the widespread commitment to South Hampshire
Rapid Transit, that it represented good value for money, it underpinned the
transport strategy for the whole of South Hampshire and its benefits would far
outstrip the costs.

The Government first approved the scheme aimed at taking three million car
journeys off local roads more than two years ago as part of a Local Transport
Plan the Government said was one of the best it had ever seen. The local
authorities followed the Government's preferred procurement route to the letter.
Since then the cost estimates increased due to a number of factors outside the
local authorities' control. These included greater insurance premiums, high
construction inflation, an increase in public utility diversion work and the fact that
the tunnel under Portsmouth harbour has to be deeper to accommodate the
Royal Navy's new ships.

The light rail market had also been affected by tram schemes elsewhere in the
country where money was lost due to over estimating the amount of revenue
available for fares, despite high passenger numbers.

Transport Secretary Alistair Darling asked the promoters to examine how the
costs could be reduced and to submit a revised proposal and that proposal is
now with Ministers awaiting a decision.

County Council Leader Councillor Ken Thornber said: "We've made the case
that SHRT1 underpins the entire transport strategy for south Hampshire. It's
about agencies working together to deliver on the social, economic and leisure
agendas in an area which has pockets of deprivation among the highest in the
country. Without light rapid transit a key piece of that strategy is removed.

"Less than a year ago Hampshire County Council was awarded a maximum 4
stars for its environment services and the Cabinet has made transportation one
of its key priorities because people told us that's what their priority was. This
scheme is a good one, it's badly needed and will deliver value for money. We're
really keen to work with the Government to deliver this vital scheme for the
people of south Hampshire."

The Leader of Portsmouth City Council, Councillor Phil Shaddock, said: "This
scheme is important for the economy, not just for Portsmouth but for south-east
Hampshire too. It is an important first core of a public transport strategy. It's
essential the Government grants the funding we have requested to bring further
prosperity to the area."

For further information please contact: Kate Ball on 01962 845626
kate.ball@hants.gov.uk



=PTP================================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/144771_hybridbuses21.html

Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Tuesday, October 21, 2003

Diesel-electric buses hit streets next year

Hybrids will save money in long run, transit officials say

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Less thick, black exhaust will spew from a new fleet of more than 200 diesel-
electric hybrid buses the region's two biggest mass-transit agencies plan to roll
out next year.

When the 60-foot articulated buses lurch into motion, they don't chug through
fuel. At low speeds, they run on a hybrid electric drive, which King County Metro
Transit expects will save 750,000 gallons of fuel and at least a half-million dollars
a year.

"The reason you save so much fuel is that the bulk of what a bus does is starting
and stopping," said Matthew Kester, a spokesman for General Motors Corp.,
which manufactures the hybrid electric drive at a transmission plant in
indianapolis.

As the bus speeds up, it uses a mix of electricity and diesel fuel. The diesel
engine, made by Caterpillar Inc., takes over once the bus reaches 20 or 25 mph,
Kester said yesterday.

"Because you're not dumping all the fuel through this diesel engine to get this
bus moving, you're getting a 90 percent improvement on emissions (of soot,
hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide)," Kester said. "Plus you've improved fuel
economy by about 50 to 60 percent."

New Flyer, a Canadian bus manufacturer based in Winnipeg, Manitoba, makes
the buses.

King County signed orders for 213 buses Friday, and Sound Transit, which runs
regional express buses in King, Pierce and Snohomish counties, bought 22 -- a
combined investment of more than $150 million.

"Obviously, it's a technology we're excited about because of the cleaner air, the
fuel savings and the maintenance savings," Sound Transit spokesman Lee
Somerstein said.

The first new hybrids are expected to hit the streets by next spring.

Today in Seattle, General Motors Corp. plans to show off the 60-foot model that
King County Metro Transit tested out before its recent purchase.

Hybrid buses cost more up front -- about $645,000 apiece, compared with
$445,000 for a standard diesel-powered bus, Metro Transit spokeswoman Linda
Thielke said.

But because they use less fuel, hybrid buses don't need their oil changed as
often and are easier to maintain, General Motors estimates that the county will
recoup its costs within about seven years.

Metro Transit bought its test model last year and put more than 40,000 miles on
it before deciding to buy the new fleet.

"It performed remarkably well," Thielke said, noting it had plenty of power
motoring up hills, ran quietly and required very little maintenance.

Sound Transit bought a 40-foot test model. "Our operations people just love it,"
Somerstein said. "They've had virtually no problems."

The hybrids will replace an aging fleet of dual-mode buses that run on overhead
electric wires while they pass through the downtown bus tunnel, then switch to
diesel outside the tunnel.

Because the new buses will have their own electricity supply, they'll no longer
rely on those overhead wires while inside the tunnel, making them easier to
maneuver.



=PTP=================================================

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/21/business/21AUTO.html?pagewanted=print&
position=

New York Times
October 21, 2003

Seattle's Transit District Buys 235 Hybrid Buses

By DANNY HAKIM

DETROIT, Oct. 20 — King County, Wash., which includes Seattle, plans to buy
235 diesel hybrid buses for its transit system, one of the largest orders for city
buses with hybrid technology.

The King County Metropolitan Transit Authority plans to spend about $47 million
more for the hybrids than it would have for conventional diesel buses. County
managers say they think they will save $27 million over 12 years by using less
fuel and oil and reducing maintenance costs, though savings from new
technologies can be hard to predict.

The buses will be on Seattle streets by May.

The hybrid engine systems, which supplement internal combustion with electric
power, will be made by General Motors for buses built by New Flyer.

"If we replace 13,000 buses in the nine largest cities, we would save 40 million
gallons of fuel annually," said Thomas G. Stephens, group vice president of G.M.
Powertrain, which is building the hybrid engine system. "That's the equivalent of
selling 500,000 small passenger car hybrids."

The 235 Seattle buses will generate fuel savings equivalent to replacing 8,000
conventional cars with hybrids, Mr. Stephens said.

New York City has also been a supporter of diesel hybrid buses, with 10 on the
road and plans for 125 more starting in December and an additional 200 by
2005. The New York buses are made by Orion Bus industries, a branch of
DaimlerChrysler, with hybrid technology from BAE Systems of Britain.

Toyota and Honda have dominated hybrid technology in cars, with sales
numbering in the tens of thousands each year. Toyota plans to sell hundreds of
thousands within a couple of years.

G.M. and the Ford Motor Company have said they will eventually sell hybrids.
G.M.'s most ambitious hybrid will be a version of the Saturn Vue sport utility
vehicle, but it will not be sold until 2005.

Building hybrid systems for buses will help G.M. develop the technology, Mr.
Stephens said, and a pilot project is under way with 10 cities using 36 of the
buses.

"The experience G.M. is gaining here is very viable beyond mass transit
applications," Mr. Stephens said. "Read that to be cars and trucks."

Buses running on compressed natural gas have been a much more common
environmentally friendly technology in the past. Seattle, however, considered
using natural gas buses but the range was too short, said Jim Boon, the county's
procurement manager. In addition, buses spend much of their time in a 1.3-mile
tunnel, where the fire department prohibits the use of natural gas, he said.

"The fire department won't allow you to take it underground," Mr. Boon said,
because of the risk of a leak.

Mr. Boon said diesel hybrids, with a combination of low sulfur fuel and emissions
filters, would burn as cleanly as natural gas.

The county expects to save 800,000 gallons of fuel and 39,000 quarts of engine
oil each year. Mr. Stephens said the hybrid system would reduce emissions of
smog-forming pollutants by 60 percent to 90 percent.

Mr. Boon said he thought maintenance costs would be cut by far fewer brake
repairs for the new electromagnetic brake system on the buses and fewer oil
changes.

"We typically change oil every 6,000 miles," he said. "On these, we'll change it
every 24,000 miles."



=PTP=================================================

[PTP NOTE: AirTrain refers to the regional rail connection to Newark Liberty
international Airport, not just the monorail internal peoplemover system]

http://www.news12.com/NJ/topstories/article?id=92813


News 12 New Jersey
(10/20/03)

Mixed reviews for the Air Train to and from Newark Liberty


NEWARK - For the past two years, the Port Authority's "Air Train" has connected
Newark Liberty Airport with New Jersey Transit and Amtrak rail lines. The
monorail service gives passengers the opportunity to travel in and out of Newark
Airport without having to park their cars or pick up a bus or taxi. Two years after
the Air Train made its debut, passengers are giving the service mostly positive
reviews.

Many riders say the Air Train is quick, convenient and a good way to connect to
destinations in New Jersey and New York City. Critics, however, think the service
is too expensive. At the high end, a one-way trip on the Air Train costs riders
about $12. According to the Tri-state Transportation Campaign, a non-profit
agency that tracks commuter travel, the Air Train fares are too high, especially
for a family of four. Others believe the fares are reasonably priced when
considering the gridlock traffic and parking nightmares associated with Newark
Liberty Airport.

The Port Authority estimates about 3,200 passengers use the Air Train each
day. Officials say ridership is up four percent, and they estimate the number of
daily passengers will triple during the holiday travel season.



=PTP=============================================

http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/index.ssf?/base/news-1/1066627558270560.xml

New Orleans Times-Picayune
Monday October 20, 2003

Amtrak proposal threatens city, says activist

Passenger train lines are at risk, he says

By Susan Finch
Staff writer

Long-distance passenger train lines such as the City of New Orleans are the
"glue" that holds the nation's rail transportation system together, but they would
likely disappear if the Bush administration persuades Congress to restructure
Amtrak to let private companies run the trains, the head of a rail passenger
advocacy group said Sunday.

Moreover, the administration's plan would spell the end of New Orleans' status
as a major rail passenger terminal, said Ross Capon, executive director of the
National Association of Railroad Passengers. That's because the only service
Amtrak, officially known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp., offers out of
Union Passenger Terminal is the long-distance kind, Capon said at a meeting of
his group's board of directors at the Royal St. Charles Hotel.

The Amtrak trains that stop here are the City of New Orleans, which runs to
Chicago; the Sunset Limited, which links Orlando, Fla., and the West Coast; and
the Crescent, which operates between New York and New Orleans with stops in
Washington, D.C., and Atlanta.

All three of those lines showed an uptick in passenger numbers in the fiscal year
that ended Sept. 30, Capon said. In September alone, he said, the City of New
Orleans line saw a 23 percent increase; the Sunset, 34.1 percent; and the
Crescent, 20.6 percent.

Another danger of the Bush plan for Amtrak, Capon said, is that if passenger
train service disappears from New Orleans, pressure likely will build for the
railroads to sell the land across which the long-distance trains run.

"Just the right to use the tracks is something that would die if Amtrak dies," he
said.

Preserving such tracks would keep in place the foundation needed to develop
commuter rail service, Capon said.

The Bush administration says it is committed to continuing passenger rail service
as a vital part of the country's transportation system. But it says the best way to
do so is not to continue subsidizing Amtrak, which has been plagued by annual
financial crises, decaying assets and sometimes unreliable service.

Under the Bush plan, all Amtrak lines except the heavily used Northeast routes
would be put up for bid to companies the administration think could run the trains
with smaller taxpayer subsidies. The cost of the federal subsidies, would
gradually shift from the federal government to the states served by Amtrak's
trains.

The White House plan has drawn fire not only from groups such as Capon's but
also from several members of Congress, including Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss.,
whose state is traversed by all three Amtrak long-distance trains that stop in New
Orleans.

Lott has joined with other lawmakers to propose a six-year plan that would give
Amtrak $2 billion a year, some of the largest federal subsidies for rail ever, and
set up a program to upgrade the rail system using $48 billion in government-
backed bonds.

Since Amtrak went into operation in the spring of 1971, federal subsidies for its
operations have totaled nearly $27 billion.

. . . . . . .


Susan Finch can be reached at sfinch@timespicayune.com or (504) 826-3340.



=PTP============================================

http://www.monorail.com.my/news.htm

KL Monorail [News Release]
Dateline: 3/10/03

KL INFRASTRUCTURE GROUP 6th ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING


KL infrastructure Group Berhad had its 6th Annual General Meeting today, its
first after public listing on the KLSE main board. Meeting was held at Sheraton
imperial Hotel Kuala Lumpur.


The Company had in its annual report, registered a net profit of RM192,000 and
earning per share of RM0.01 in its last financial year ending 30 April 2003. Profit
was wholly contributed by its media marketing company Monorail Multimedia
Sdn Bhd which holds the right to all advertising space in the KL Monorail
corridor.


KL Monorail System Sdn Bhd, the main subsidiary of KL infrastructure Group
holds the concession for the construction, operation and maintenance of the
RM1.18billion, 8.6km monorail system in the city centre. The company had on 31
August 2003, launched its revenue operation and is not expected to contribute to
the group earnings until the next financial year.


in September, the KL Monorail carried some 350,000 passengers during its
introductory service running 5 hours a day with a train interval of 10 minutes.
Since October, it extended its operation hours to run from 7am to 8pm and on 8
October, 40 days after it launched its operation, it received its 500,000th
passenger.


Currently 6 trains are in operation and eventually by the early next year, 12 trains
will operate from 6am to 12 midnight with a train frequency ranging from 3
minutes to 15 minutes.


Revenues for KL infrastructure come from 3 main streams, namely, fare
collection from the monorail operation, advertisement space rental, and leasing
of retail space in the monorail stations and in "Jalan-Jalan Xintiandi", a riverside
food and leisure development which is part of the KL Monorail project in
Brickfields.


http://www.monorail.com.my/news.htm




=PTP============================================

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/lifestyle/chi-
0310140066oct14,1,6358088.story?coll=chi-leisuretempo-hed

Chicago Tribune
October 14, 2003

AT RANDOM RADIO

Cyclists fail to see the humor in deejays' calls for assaults
 Advertisement

By J. Michael Kennedy
Tribune Newspapers: Los Angeles Times

Kevin Bray was, well, shocked, when he heard that shock jocks were urging their
listeners to run bicyclists off the road. He was horrified when he found out it had
happened at least three times since July, in each case at stations owned by
radio behemoth Clear Channel -- first in Cleveland, then Houston and finally at a
station in Raleigh, N.C. To Bray, an avid cyclist and veteran North Carolina
highway patrolman, there seemed to be an ominous pattern developing.

"All I can say is, 'Who's next?'" said Bray, who has filed a complaint against the
Raleigh station with the Federal Communications Commission. "What these
people are doing is some sort of sick marketing ploy."

That thought has also occurred to Patrick McCormick, director of
communications for the 40,000-member League of American Bicyclists, an
organization dedicated to preserving cyclists' rights. He said his group has been
deluged with complaints now that three major radio markets have been beset by
the same anti-cyclist comments. "We're still contemplating what we're going to
do as a national organization," McCormick said.

The incidents have stirred rage in the cycling world. In each incident, disc
jockeys derided cyclists and encouraged listeners to run them down. In the latest
example, at Raleigh station WDCG-FM, disc jockeys Bob Dumas and Madison
Lane began their rant against cyclists Sept. 22. In the course of the program,
listeners flooded their telephone lines to vent about cyclists, including one
woman who boasted that her father intentionally hit one while they were on the
way to church. One of the disc jockeys promoted the joys of hitting cyclists with
Yoo-hoo bottles.

Warning to shock jocks

When patrolman Bray heard about the program, he wrote an e-mail to the shock
jocks, warning them they were instructing the motoring public in how to commit
assault with a deadly weapon -- their cars. Bray also informed them that he was
reporting them to the FCC.

"I don't know much about radio broadcasting," he wrote. "But I have enough
sense to know that these acts are either illegal or contrary to the code of ethics
you should be bound by when the FCC allows you to go on the air."

The station's initial response came from station manager Kenneth Spitzer, who
referred to the show as "animated banter." But after a demonstration outside the
station and the threat by advertisers to pull out, Spitzer issued a public apology
on the air Thursday.

The first of the anti-cyclist diatribe occurred in July in Cleveland, when WMJi-FM
disc jockeys suggested cyclists be rammed off the road. One of those who got
on the phone to defend cyclists was Lois Cowan, who co-owns four bike shops in
the Cleveland area.

"I was repeatedly called a buffoon, an idiot and a PMS sufferer who couldn't take
a joke," she said. "Then there were three hours of calls from people saying,
'Yeah, you guys are right.'"

The session left Cowan in tears, but she immediately swung into action, helping
engineer a bombardment of calls and e-mails to the station. In the end, the
station called a truce and agreed to, among other things, hundreds of public-
service announcements about the need to share the road.

Timing angers cyclists

The Houston incident also took place in September, and the timing of the show
infuriated the city's cycling community. On Aug. 30, a woman driving a pickup
truck had lost control and slammed into a 20-bike pace line, killing two riders and
injuring eight others. Three days later, the disc jockeys at station KLOL-FM went
on their anti-biking rampage, setting off another round of protests.

"When you incite people to violence, you've crossed the line," said Houston
cyclist Frank Karbarz, who helped organize against the station. "They did it
almost like a tutorial. It wasn't humorous. It was how to hurt someone."

Cowan doesn't believe that Clear Channel, which owns more than 1,200 radio
stations in the United States, is encouraging the anti-cycling venom. She said it's
more probable that word spread among disc jockeys that knocking cyclists is
sure to push emotional buttons with their listeners.

A Clear Channel representative said each station was "operated and produced
independently" and "each station is working to correct the problem in their city."

But noted cycling writer Ed Pavelka said he felt the three incidents have at least
the makings of a trend. "First it was Cleveland, then Houston and Raleigh," he
said. "Either someone's not getting the message, or someone's doing it with
intent."

in 2001, 728 cyclists were killed in accidents involving motor vehicles in the
United States. And an additional 45,000 cyclists were injured.

Legally, cyclists are afforded the same rights as motorists. Lawyer Gary Brustin,
who specializes in cycling cases, noted that some motorists just don't like
sharing the road with bikes. "They just don't like them."











PTP 2003/10/20-A - CONTENTS

* Houston ed: Vote for transit solutions, reject highway myths
   Houston Chronicle  Sept. 26, 2003

* Houston: Former anti-rail mayor backs rail plan
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 18, 2003

* Houston op-ed: Metro transit plan can help cure congestion
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 18, 2003

* Houston op-ed:  Ride bus, support rail plan
   Houston Chronicle  Oct. 19, 2003

* Seattle Mariners fight move to drop monorail station
   Seattle Times  Sunday, October 19, 2003

* Sacramento rail yard to become TOD, multi-modal center
   Sacramento Business Journal September 15, 2003



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 18, 2003

 Editorial


FOR METRO'S PLAN

Approve transit solutions; reject highway myths

The steamboat, the locomotive, the automobile, the Wright brothers' first
powered airplane -- all were ridiculed in their day before they proved to be
engines of progress that increased the quality and bounds of human life. Voters
should view the Metropolitan Transit Authority's transit proposal on the Nov. 4
ballot in the same light.

The plan, dubbed Metro Solutions, proposes to expand local and express bus
routes and Park & Ride facilities. It would increase the frequency and hours of
bus operations and expand the fledgling light-rail line that will open in the Main
Street corridor on Jan. 1.

Many critics of the plan shamelessly swear they are not opposed to light rail, they
are only opposed to every light-rail route Metro has ever proposed. Do they really
think light rail should avoid downtown, the city's principal colleges and
universities, the Texas Medical Center, and the three new sports stadiums?
Should light-rail not serve the airports, the Galleria and other employment and
commercial centers?

Houston's been arguing rail transit for more than 20 years. Where are the rail
proposals from Metro's opponents, who claim superior planning ability?

As they consider the merits of Metro Solutions, voters should take care to
separate the facts from the myths and check the claims and numbers of those
who say we can build enough roads and freeways to reduce congestion.

According to Texas A&M University's Texas Transportation institute, respected
by both sides of the argument, congestion in the Houston region rose 97 percent
during the 1990s, when the region spent nothing on rail and more on roads than
any state but California. The limits of freeway expansion are plainly exhibited in
the stretch of businesses and houses in Spring Valley that must be scraped to
make way for new concrete on the Katy Freeway -- at a cost twice that of the 22
rail miles voters are asked to approve Nov. 4.

Rail critics say it relies upon 19th-century technology, but the internal combustion
engine used by cars and trucks long predates clean, electric-powered rail transit.
Critics say mass transit doesn't reduce congestion, but ignore the fact that
congestion is growing faster in cities without multimodal mass transit. They say
transit money would be better invested to help people who don't use mass
transit, but forget that federal transit aid would go to other cities' transit, not to
our roads.

While the fight seems to be over light rail, Metro Solutions is more bus and HOV
lane than rail. Metro will also spend another $800 million to subsidize municipal
and county street repairs, freeing other local tax dollars to be spent on other vital
community needs.

Viewed in any light, the facts support the value of Metro Solutions. The myths
offered by rail opponents are, put less charitably, falsehoods.

The Chronicle urges voters to vote "For" the detailed transit referendum on Nov.
4, giving Houston-area residents an alternative to long and frustrating periods
spent stalled in traffic.



http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/2166689



=PTP===============================================

[PTP NOTE: As mayor, Bob Lanier (a former head of the Texas Highway
Commission) engineered the scuttling of Houston Metro's effort to launch an
elevated rail transit or monorail project in the early 1990s.  instead, he strong-
armed Metro into redirecting some of its funds into subsidizing roadways.  His
endorsement of the current Metro Solutions plan, calling for expansion of light
rail, is a breakthrough.]

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 18, 2003

Viewpoints

Why I will be voting for the Metro plan

By BOB LANIER

it's important that Houston come together on transportation, come together on
transit and rail, come together on highways and on city and county roads. The
Metro Solutions Plan, which includes rail, buses, roads and no tax increase, is a
good consensus plan. I support it and will vote for it.

The consensus plan has three fundamental elements that will be addressed by
voters in the November referendum. First, the city charter requires that the
overall rail plan be voted on before the Metropolitan Transit Authority uses city
right of way. Second, the plan commits 25 percent of Metro's sales tax to general
mobility (roads) for the next 10 years. Third, the plan authorizes $640 million in
bonds to be used, along with substantial federal funding, to implement the
consensus plan.

With respect to rail, the Main Street line is near completion, and I think it has a
good chance of success. It's logical to build extensions from where we are, Main
Street line, into neighborhoods, moving residents to work downtown or in the
Medical Center and to other activities.

The biggest mobility gain we can make in a low-density city such as Houston is
to shorten the distance between residences and the workplace. There is, over
time, room for a good half-million new residents inside Loop 610. If these new
residents shorten their work trips, we will have 2 million to 3 million trips, maybe
10 to 15 passenger miles, a day that will be shortened. Metro's initial light-rail
system is designed to link close-in neighborhoods and Houston's major
employment and activity centers -- the Medical Center, downtown, Greenway
and the Galleria, as well as our major universities, the University of Houston, UH-
Downtown, Texas Southern University, Houston Community College and Rice
University.

Now do I know this will work? No, I really don't. But I think it has a good chance.
Rail will cost some more, but the public will get a somewhat nicer ride and, as a
result, some additional ridership. The big benefit of this plan will be that it really
supports this movement that is happening in Houston -- to some extent around
the nation -- of people moving closer to the workplace. Light rail makes sense
inside Loop 610, serving close-in neighborhoods, employment centers and
universities, athletic arenas, restaurants, etc. It's not a heavy carrier of people,
but it can be of great service within 610. And it won't hurt to have this upscale
transportation going to some of these inner-city neighborhoods.

After this initial light-rail system is created, the community should consider
development of long-haul rail transit on Metro's own grade-separated right of
way. This kind of rail service is really the heavy carrier of people within the rail
family. Long-haul service to the airport or to the suburbs, such as the proposed
line to Fort Bend communities, should be grade separated. Metro's rail car
technology is adaptable for this kind of service, but this development should not
be considered until the initial light-rail connector system is in place, and is
successful. We have to build from the inside out.

The community needs to realize that the bus is the workhorse of any transit
system, and it will be the workhorse of this plan. If we built all 73 miles of
proposed rail, buses will still carry roughly 75 percent of the total transit traffic.
Buses carry about 75 percent of total transit traffic in Dallas, which already has
40 miles of light rail in operation. So the bus is the workhorse of Houston's transit
operation, and we must consider all the people who ride the bus, and who may
have concerns that the bus operation will be neglected as we include light rail in
our system. In fact, the consensus plan calls for expanding the bus system --
more buses, more express and cross-town routes, and improved and expanded
Park & Ride service.

Metro has a solid record of providing excellent bus service and the consensus
plan builds on that record. Some 12 years ago, Metro started its better bus
program. Dallas added 40 miles of rail. Today, Houston buses carry more than
50 percent more passengers than does Dallas rail and bus combined. Houston's
bus operation is No. 1 in the state in terms of ridership, market share and
passenger miles carried. The rail will be additive and popular, I believe.

With regard to Metro's proposal to continue investing in roads, it is important to
note that for 25 years, 1978 to 2003, Metro has spent 25 percent of its sales tax
dollars on roads. During that time, Metro, without debt, built a billion-dollar better
bus program for which we received $500 million in federal funding. Further,
Metro helped build the 100-mile transitway system that facilitates moving buses
and carpools for long-haul trips. Metro also is paying more than $300 million for
the Main Street rail line. And during this time Metro achieved No. 1 transit status
in Texas. The rail will be additive to this base.

The continuance of the Metro road money, which is provided for in the
proposition, is therefore feasible. It is also essential. This money has been used
in our neighborhoods-to-standards program, where neighborhoods have been
completely redone -- newly surfaced city streets and major thoroughfares and
new sidewalks. These neighborhoods must be attractive places where new
residents will move. The consensus plan provides an overall package -- you can't
let the rail lines run into neighborhoods where the maintenance has been
neglected.

This has been a difficult decision for me. I've had a long history with
transportation, including transit. But I really believe that what we are about to do
is in the best interest of our community.

I believe in my heart that approving Metro's consensus plan is in the best interest
of Houston. It's not about partisan politics. It's not about winning a point of view.
Its about doing what, in your hearts, you really feel like is best for the community.
I think we are better off approving this plan.


Lanier was mayor of Houston from 1991 to 1997. In the 1980s he served as
chairman of the Metropolitan Transit Authority.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2164431



=PTP================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 18, 2003

Viewpoints

Curing congestion

Accidents, disabled vehicles and road debris cause congestion, some say as
much as 50 percent

By DAVID HITCHCOCK

A friend informed me several years ago that no one goes to Ninfa's anymore
because it's too crowded. Yogi Berra couldn't have said it any better.

I remember this when I hear discussions about congestion, like those in
Houston's mayoral race and current light-rail debates. U.S. cities faced with
population loss or dismal economies aren't worried about congestion. It's
thriving, growing communities like Houston where too much traffic hits the road.

To effectively address congestion, we need to be clear about what causes it and
what doesn't.

Accidents, disabled vehicles and road debris cause congestion, some say as
much as 50 percent. Add rubbernecking to this as well. We also cause
congestion by building service roads adjacent to every freeway. The
development that occurs next to the freeways adds to congestion and other
traffic problems. There are better ways to do this.

The lack of a good arterial street system and minimal control over street access
also contribute to congestion. None of these causes will be addressed by
roadway expansion.

Another cause is roadway construction itself. Some roadway projects today
experience so much delay that the time lost by current travelers is greater than
any future time-saving, a negative return for taxpayers and travelers alike. This is
particularly troublesome, since time-saving for drivers is a principal justification
for roadway projects.

Furthermore, most of today's projects are for maintenance, not expansion.
Maintenance is absolutely essential, and transportation officials should be
encouraged to invest heavily in this area, but maintenance also causes
congestion.

Paradoxically, congestion is driven more by changes in our travel behavior than
growth. In Houston, while our population increased by 29 percent from 1982 to
1997, our driving increased by 72 percent.

We are driving more, driving farther and driving by ourselves more often. We've
switched from transit and other travel modes to driving. In the United States
these changes have accounted for a whopping 87 percent of increased vehicle
travel.

The causes of congestion are not about work trips either, which now account for
less than 20 percent of all trips. Look around you -- many of those sitting in traffic
with you are not headed to work.

The changes in the ways we travel and the ways we build our transportation
system have taken us to the physical limits of some key segments of our
roadway system, and adding capacity will only address part of the problem.

The usual thinking about the cause of congestion is too many vehicles in too little
space. Expanding roadways addresses the space issue, but not the vehicle
issue. Since we now believe that we have no other choice but driving, expanding
roadways is the only solution we are willing to consider.

Our public policies often support this belief and this single solution. However,
many transportation experts and officials have stated bluntly that we cannot build
our way out of congestion. The leading U.S. report on congestion by the Texas
Transportation institute makes this point clearly. The solution (to congestion) is
really a diverse set of options that require funding commitments, as well as a
variety of changes in the ways that transportation systems are used. Of the five
major options described in the report, only one is expansion -- but this includes
expansion of roadways and transit. The fifth part of the report's solutions to
congestion is get used to it (I'm paraphrasing).

For most things in our lives (except transportation), we expect and demand
choices. Many of us can choose to drive, walk, bike or share rides. Some of us
have transit available. But unfortunately, most of us consider every option but
driving to be inadequate or unsatisfactory to meet our travel needs.

At the same time, there are literally hundreds of ways to reduce or change travel
that also reduce congestion. Examples include: trip chaining, changes in
employee transportation benefits, congestion pricing, mileage-based insurance,
transportation-efficient mortgages, walk-to-school programs, programs to
encourage ride-sharing, smart-growth development practices, mixed-use
development, auto-free zones, peripheral parking areas, car sharing, health
incentives for nonmotorized travel, telecommuting, internet shopping, etc.

Most of these are probably unknown to the reader, and the complexity is part of
why we don't use them. We prefer single, straightforward solutions (like build
more roads), not complexities. We prefer silver bullets and sound bites.

For several reasons these have not been priorities for Houston:

· History: Our experience is in building roads, and that's where our expertise lies.
We have little experience in anything else.

· Car ownership: We have invested heavily in two or more vehicles in each
household, and are willing to spend more on our personal transportation system
than other major cities.

· infatuation: We love our vehicles, and they are an important part of our lives.

· Funding: We have large, dedicated sources of funds which are used mostly for
highways.

· Decision-making: Road-building interests have more influence on policy-makers
and community leaders. Fortunately, some road-building interests are now
beginning to see that, like air quality, we must have a different strategy if we are
to solve the congestion problem.

Solving Houston's traffic congestion will require smarter, more resilient strategies
than we've seen to date.

Congestion is not about transit versus highways, as the opponents of light rail
would have it. It is about having a full menu of transportation options. ironically,
the single-option solution of building more highways will continue to be
unsatisfactory to most people. They take too long to build or expand. The
benefits are often marginal. The process of building them is painful. And, after all
that, there is still congestion.

if we pursue a more diverse, dynamic transportation system with more choices,
people in the future may say that Houston's a great place, with so many easy
ways to get around.

Or we may hear that people just don't go to Houston anymore. It's too crowded.


Hitchcock is an urban and regional planner who has lived in Houston for almost
20 years. He currently lives in The Woodlands, close to work, and his wife works
from home. Hitchcock can be e-mailed at DavidH1310@aol.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2164429



=PTP================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 19, 2003


SOUNDING BOARD

View of light rail from the seat of a bus

By VERONICA BUCIO


Did you see what bus that was that just passed?" a blur of a man asked as he
quickly walked by.

I didn't have to think about it. "A Number 2," I said. The digital sign on the front of
the bus was broken, and I had to squint to see the handwritten number on a
sheet of paper taped to the windshield.

"Oh, I'm glad it wasn't a 15. I hope I haven't missed it."

I didn't tell him he had. There was no point in disappointing him. I'd seen a No.
15 speed by the empty bus stop before I crossed the street toward it a couple of
minutes before.

The Metro schedule in my purse said there'd be another one in a little more than
10 minutes.

He paced a bit, looked down the street for the next bus and then took a seat on
the other steel bench a few feet from mine, where I got my first good look at the
man. As he rushed to light a cigarette, his clothes continued to speak for him:
faded and dusty blue work pants, an old black

T-shirt, cement-splattered work boots and a fatigue tote bag.

it was almost twilight downtown, and he was off the job at any one of the
construction sites not far from the corner of San

Jacinto and Prairie.


The bus was almost full as I boarded it around 8:35 a.m., so I took the seat
nearest the door. "These seats must be vacated for seniors and the disabled,"
signs beside the rows on both aisles advised. I slid over one at the next stop to
allow a slightly stooped old man to sit down.

Smiling, he thanked me in Spanish and said he moved slowly because of his
age.

As soon as he was settled, he picked up a large black bobby pin from a ledge
next to him and asked if it were mine. I smiled and said no.

"In Mexico, they used to open ... " he said, stopping to find a word. "Doors?" i
offered. "Yes," he continued, amused, "they used to open doors with these."

I let a crack about the old TV show MacGyver go by; even if my Spanish had
been quick enough (and it wasn't), I wouldn't have been able to make the cultural
translation it might have needed. He'd moved on to "It seems as if it's going to be
a beautiful day today" before I'd barely finished the thought.

Smiling and mumbling in agreement, I looked over my shoulder out the window,
just in time to catch a favorite sight along the four-mile trip through the city's
northside to downtown: Luis Jimenez's wildly fantastic fiberglass sculpture,
Vaquero, in Moody Park.


The experience of riding the bus to and from work a few days last week was
mostly as I remembered it being 20 years ago. While a freshman at the
University of Houston, during the months before I bought my first car, i
commuted between the central campus, a duplex in Montrose and a job near the
Astrodome.

The memories and sensations about those days that I'd carried around in my
mind since then replayed themselves in real time: The slightly awkward wait at
bus stops, where it seems as if you're on pause while the rest of the planet -- the
world of drivers in the cars passing by -- fast-forwards. The feel of a moving bus
as it makes long arcs around corners and softly jarring bounces over potholes.
The unintended but inevitable social interaction with other passengers, strangers
with whom you inadvertently rub shoulders or thighs in tight squeezes. The small
dramas that play out all around if you're curious enough to notice them.

The experience was exactly the same but for one difference: This time, I rode a
bus because I wanted to, not because I had to.

And what a difference that makes.

it was an experiment. I wanted to explore a contradiction I seem to share with
many Houstonians about public transportation. Most of us believe strongly in the
community need for it, and most are willing to spend taxes to fund it. But
relatively few of us actually use it. Most of us believe public transportation --
buses for now, and light rail, beyond the Main line, perhaps in the future -- is
good for other people. People who don't have a choice. The rest of us drive.

As a believer, I acknowledge the weak spot that contradiction creates in
arguments for supporting public transportation and, more specifically, the Metro
Solution referendum up for vote two weeks from now. So, I left my car in the
driveway, walked to the closest bus stop, paid the dollar fare -- and put my
support to a test.

I was surprised by the outcome.

Unlike 20 years ago, when I viewed riding a bus as drudgery, I enjoyed the
experience overall: the walk, one block from home, three blocks to work; the
mingling with humanity; leaving the driving to someone else. The bus drivers
were polite, the interiors were clean and the buses arrived mostly on time.

it was eye-opening and mind-changing.

And because of it, buses will become part of my commute. I'm going to walk the
walk and ride the ride.

if Houston truly plans to become a multimodal transportation city, more of us will
have to leave cars in our driveways.

That plan has my vote.

Bucio, assistant Outlook editor, is a member of the Chronicle Editorial Board.
(veronica.bucio@chron.com)

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/2167811



=PTP=============================================

Seattle Times
Sunday, October 19, 2003


Mariners decry proposal to drop monorail station

SEATTLE — The Mariners issued a strongly worded letter last week opposing
the possible cancellation of a proposed monorail station near the right-field
stands of Safeco Field.

Clyde Maciver, Mariners executive vice president, emphasized that the ballpark
station was integral to last year's voter-approved monorail plan, and losing it
would hurt the monorail's ridership and revenues.

Recently, Seattle Monorail Project officials have considered whether to cut the
Safeco station and build a larger "superstation" at King Street. Monorail board
chairman Tom Weeks says that could prevent overcrowding on stadium
concourses near the trains.

Another issue is the state Department of Transportation, which owns land the
monorail needs to build the Safeco station but has been unwilling to sell.

Maciver's letter said monorail officials should be trying harder to get the DOT
site.


=PTP=========================================

[BATN]

* Sacramento downtown UP rail yard redevelopment


Sacramento Business Journal

September 15, 2003

Downtown railyard sale almost final
Buyer may add 65% to city's retail plan

By Mike McCarthy
Staff Writer


Developer-architect Jon Jerde and Union Pacific Railroad Co. have
worked out most of a deal for Jerde to buy the downtown Sacramento
railyard by year-end.


The only remaining issue is securing insurance to protect both
parties from any future problems rising from the 240-acre site's
environmental cleanup, said Mike Casey, director of special
properties for Union Pacific of Omaha, Neb.


Jerde's team is not disclosing details of its development plan yet.
But knowledgeable sources say his development company, Millennia
Associates of Los Angeles, has shaped a basic, tentative plan to
show to various downtown groups and interests. It calls for:


* A largely residential project with more than 3,000 houses and
apartments -- enough to bring more than 6,000 new residents
downtown.


* 2.5 million square feet of offices.


* About 800,000 square feet of retail and entertainment, including
attractions intended to lure shoppers, diners and audiences from
miles away.


The attractions might include a subsidized new stadium for the
Sacramento Kings, although that idea has stalled over a probable
cost that has ballooned to well above $500 million.


No one's discussing the sale price of the land, but industry
yardsticks suggest it would be at least $100 million.


The environmental cleanup of the railyard is expected to take
several more years. The Amtrak depot at the site will eventually be
part of a new train/bus/light-rail station.


Enough new retail to trigger a fight? Compared to the existing
redevelopment plan for the railyard, Jerde's plan proposes more
housing and fewer offices because that seems to be what the market
and city want.


Jerde's version also calls for more shopping. The city's current
plan sets aside 527,000 square feet for retail and entertainment.
Jerde's plan calls for about 800,000, sources said, although the
figure could not be confirmed. A regional mall typically has 1
million square feet.


Jerde has worked on projects in the cores of other U.S. cities,
including a railyard redevelopment in Salt Lake City, and the local
project resembles those ventures. He usually includes a large
section for stores, restaurants and entertainment.


The big question here is how downtown Sacramento landlords,
merchants and others would respond to the arrival of potential
competitors.


Eager to mesh: "Whatever is developed there needs linkages to the
downtown business community and needs to complement it," said
Michael Ault, executive director of the Downtown Sacramento
Partnership, a powerful coalition of landlords and
merchants. "There's still a lot that needs to be done on J, K and L
streets."


The partnership led the charge that defeated a proposal by Mills
Corp. of Arlington, Va., in 1999 to build a large retail center on
the mostly empty former railyard. The partnership's members include
Westfield America Inc. of Los Angeles, which owns the 1.2 million-
square-foot Westfield Shoppingtown Downtown Plaza and was worried
about the possible competition.


The city has been trying to boost foot traffic downtown for years,
with mixed success. Jerde said he is taking pains to assure downtown
interests, city officials and the rest of the community that the
final plan for the site would depend on their input.


"If we don't mesh with downtown, it would be a complete flop," he
said. "If we can't enhance the existing setting, it just won't
work."


Jerde said he understands that merchants and landlords would worry
about potential conflict with redevelopment projects, but added that
his plans enhance downtown business.


"We just have conceptual ideas now," said Suheil Totah, a land-use
attorney and partner in the law firm of Morrison & Foerster LLP,
who's working with the Jerde group in Sacramento. "There won't be
anything definite until we talk with the community.









PTP Digest 2003/10/19-A = CONTENTS

* Houston Metro unveils new LRT cars to public
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 18, 2003

* Houston:  LRT experiences offer ammunition to fans, foes	
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 18, 2003

* Houston rail vote faces uphill struggle
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 18, 2003

* Houston Chronicle's letters policy
   Houston Chronicle Sun. Oct. 19, 2003

* Phoenix: 'Light rail can be boon to retailers'
   Arizona Republic Oct. 17, 2003

* Salt Lake agency seeks deals to expedite rail development
   Salt Lake Tribune  THURSDAY October 16, 2003

* Austin: 'Scenario D' LRT & bus plan has least cost, least sprawl
   News 8 Austin 10/15/2003

* San Jose forum debates Smart Growth, TOD, rail
   Silicon Valley Biz ink Friday, September 12, 2003

* Seattle: More on plan for Sounder regional rail to Everett
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, October 17, 2003

* Automatic RR crossing horns may cut train noise
   Toledo Blade Tuesday, October 14, 2003



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 18, 2003


[PHOTO]
John Everett / Chronicle
Workers ready Metro's new light rail cars in preparation for a public preview
today.


Public gets first look at Metro's rail cars

By TODD ACKERMAN


Houstonians got their first tour of Metro's new light rail cars today and most gave
them a big thumbs up.

Two and a half months before the first line becomes operational, two of the
sleek, 95-foot-long, 12-feet-tall cars were placed on the track outside Reliant
Stadium as part of a Metro event allowing the public to step aboard Metro
vehicles.

"I can't wait until they start running," said Anne Jasian, a Sugar Land
homemaker. "They're so clean and beautiful. I'll definitely take the kids on it.
They're excited about it right now, except that they wish they could ride it."

Greg Smith, a Houston salesman, called the day "a good start." He said once
light rail is established, "once Houston wakes up and smells the coffee," it will
become quite popular.

Light rail seemed popular with most of the steady flow that made it out to Metro's
Discover Metro Day event. A smattering of people interviewed cited a variety of
reasons for liking the cars -- from their look to their anticipated effect on pollution
-- and said they planned to vote for Metro's $640 million light rail bond issue next
month.

The mood was decidedly different at the first of a series of town meetings
scheduled by U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, an opponent of Metro's
light rail plan. No one from Metro showed up so Culberson and Harris County
Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt, a member of the anti-rail Texans for
True Mobility group, spoke against Metro's plan.

"This plan would spend too much money to move too few people," said
Culberson. "It wouldn't be fiscally responsible to support it."

Although the town hall meeting occasionally turned testy, a majority of the people
in attendance seemed supportive of Culberson's and Bettencourt's arguments.

it was much more festive at the balloon-draped Discover Metro Day. Besides
touring the new rail cars, visitors saw Metro's new hybrid diesel-electric buses,
Metro Police's drag racing car and a restored, open-air 12-passenger bus used
in 1924.

Metro's transportation of the future, the light rail car, was first unveiled and
toured May 1, but that was only for invited guests, Mayor Lee Brown among
them. The two cars outside Reliant Stadium will continue to be open to the
general public Sunday until game time.

This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2166078



=PTP==============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 18, 2003

From coast to coast, rail tales offer contrasts

By LUCAS WALL


SALT LAKE CITY -- With a major sporting event just around the corner, work
crews are everywhere patching torn-up streets, scrambling to complete new
buildings and laying miles of tracks for sleek new trains to ferry the anticipated
crowds.

Sound familiar? Such was the scene in Utah's capital two years ago as it hurried
to pretty itself in time for the 2002 Winter Olympics. The rush resembled the
frenzy now occurring in Houston, which is hosting the 2004 Super Bowl and
wants to show itself off.

Salt Lake City is the most recent U.S. city to open a light rail system. The first
TRAX trains began running in 1999 after an intense political debate that mirrors
the fight in Houston. But after the games were over, the city seems to have
reached a consensus that rail is an important part of its transportation network.

We are on the cusp here in Salt Lake City of a very exciting advance in terms of
public transportation, not only helping clean up the air and saving the destruction
of our open spaces but providing the mobility freedom, said Mayor Rocky
Anderson. We're providing this inspiration for people throughout the country.
They are looking at Salt Lake City, marveling at the great public support we now
have.

  Last month, the Utah Transit Authority opened the third segment of TRAX.
Ridership on the first two segments has been much higher than projected,
downtown development is picking up -- thanks in part to the Olympics boost --
and riders rave about the inexpensive, stress-free commute.

But light rail's record in 18 U.S. cities is a mixed bag, making it difficult for
Houston voters to predict what will happen if they approve Metro's Nov. 4 transit-
expansion referendum. The centerpiece is a $640 million bond issue to
accelerate construction of the next 22 miles of light rail, additions to the 7 1/2-
mile line along the Main Street corridor that is scheduled to open a month before
the Feb. 1 Super Bowl.

The Metropolitan Transit Authority and its supporters tout numerous benefits that
light rail can produce, including the potential to change the shape of future
Houston development. They envision an inner Loop that sprouts "urban villages"
-- New York-style, pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods along the tracks where
residents can move around the city without a car.

Rail opponents dismiss this as fantasy, arguing that Houstonians love their
vehicles and that spreading people out keeps housing costs down. Metro's
proposed trains cost too much and will not attract enough riders to reduce
congestion or change the city, they say.

So while proponents around the country label light rail a tremendous success,
critics deride it as an utter failure. Deciding who is right might depend on where
you look.

When comparing light rail systems, seven, including Salt Lake City's, stand out
as success stories. Five boast decent ridership and benefits to the community,
but leave residents with a sense there should be more. In six cities, such as
Buffalo, N.Y., the systems can be regarded as failures.

But even the successes are born of strife, as in Los Angeles, where constant
political wrangling, major cost overruns and slow trains make many continue to
question whether rail transit is worth it.


in 1992, Salt Lake City voters rejected a plan to double the Utah Transit
Authority's one-fourth-cent sales tax to fund light rail. UTA proceeded to cobble
together local money and get Utah's congressional delegation to obtain 80
percent federal funding. The first line, 15 miles between downtown and the
suburb of Sandy, opened in 1999.

"From that moment on, the entire community has embraced public transit," said
John inglish, UTA's general manager. "We're now enjoying the most amazing
renaissance in our community that I would not have imagined 10 years ago."

Skeptics such as James Grisso, doubtful the city of 182,000 could support light
rail, were surprised at its success.

"People underestimated the value of this system," said Grisso, who voted
against the 1992 referendum but now rides TRAX daily to the University of Utah.

Euphoric at its sudden popularity, UTA went back to the voters in 2000 and
secured the extra quarter-cent.

Flush with new tax revenue, the authority scrambled to finish its second segment
between downtown and the university in time for the Olympics. Residents saw
hundreds of thousands ride the transit system during the 17-day games,
sparking more interest.

Last month, UTA opened the final piece of the Red Line to the university's
medical center. Numerous local dignitaries joined some 300 spectators for the
ribbon-cutting ceremony. Inglish noted that UTA carries more than 20 percent of
trips to the university, which "is taking out thousands of parking spaces and
converting them to buildings."

The rail has helped attract some new investment, most notably The Gateway,
which has reclaimed downtown's western industrial reaches. The outdoor
shopping mall is next to the Delta Center, where both rail lines end. A seven-
story, 330-unit apartment complex is attached to the mall, and a 12-story, 152-
condominium tower is going up.

UTA is examining several corridors for future expansion and is considering
asking voters to double its tax again, to a full cent.

Bill Millnar, president of the American Public Transportation Association, which
held its annual meeting in Salt Lake City last month, said Houston voters could
look at Metro's rail proposal as too small. But as Salt Lake City demonstrates, he
said, you have to start somewhere.

"These are networks and links," Millnar said. "You can't build the third link unless
you built the second link unless you built the first link."

Just about every rider interviewed onboard TRAX trains spoke proudly of their
light rail.

"You definitely want it," Connie Yates said to Houston voters as her Blue Line
train carried her at 55 mph toward a Park & Ride lot, from which she would drive
the last six miles to home. "The people who swore they would never ride it, that it
was just the biggest waste of time, I have had personal comments from them
saying that they have sold cars because they didn't need them anymore because
they ride this faithfully."


Light rail's story is not so cheery everywhere, though. In Buffalo, the Niagara
Frontier Transportation Authority ran out of money halfway through construction
of its Main Street light rail line in 1985 and has never been able to come up with
the cash or political support to extend the six-mile chunk it ended up with.

Buffalo is the only U.S. city to build a modern light rail line and never expand it.
But if Houston voters reject Metro's Nov. 4 referendum, the Bayou City could
share that distinction.

The city, on the shore of Lake Erie, had a 35-mile system plan when construction
began in the 1970s. The first line was to travel 12 miles from the harbor through
downtown to the State University of New York at Buffalo's main campus in
suburban Amherst. When the NFTA ran out of money and federal grants dried
up, the project was stopped at the university's smaller south campus just inside
the city limits.

"It could have been a catalyst to really change the face of downtown if they built
the spurs to the outlying communities," said Mayor Anthony Masiello. "Without
the spurs, this hasn't been successful. It hasn't generated the private-sector
investment or the critical mass it was envisioned to do.

"If we had known that that's all we would have gotten, the six-mile main trunk,
then we would have never done this."

Buffalo, current population 288,000, had an ambitious plan two decades ago. It
closed the heart of Main Street to vehicle traffic and turned it into a mile-long
pedestrian mall with trains running through the middle. But the expected
revitalization -- thousands of apartments, new office towers, department stores --
never materialized, and the grand idea is about to be abandoned.

"We lost the momentum that the initial opening had," Masiello said. "We are now
looking at ways to restore vehicle traffic to Main Street."

Some have called for ripping up the train tracks, labeling light rail a dismal
failure. But Lawrence Meckler, NFTA executive director, said that would be going
too far. He noted that the train carries 21,700 riders a day and would take a lot of
buses to replace. And five miles of the tracks are in a subway, where the train
travels at a greater speed.

"I still think the Metro Rail is a positive," Meckler said. "We see it as successful,
popular and safe. It moves people. ... For its length, it is one of the most heavily
used systems in the country."

But, he admitted, "It hasn't worked out the way the planners thought it would."

Rail proponents point out that downtown Buffalo's woes cannot be solely blamed
on the addition of train tracks. Buffalo's economy has been in a steep slide for
decades as the steel mills that fueled employment shuttered one by one. The
city has lost half its population since 1950, leading to declining property values
and a diminished tax base.

The mayor said it proved impossible to sell more rail in a city that has no traffic
problem and is under the scrutiny of a financial control board.

"If it's done right, it will work well for Houston," Masiello said. "If Houston is in a
growth mode, then you're going to have to deal with these problems sooner or
later. But will Houstonians give up their cars? I'm not sure they will."

Buffalo-area residents said the short line is an embarrassing symbol of their
city's decline, and they were split on whether NFTA should expand it.

"This is a comfortable way to move people," Bruce Weikleenget of Amherst said
while taking the train home after jury duty. "It should go farther."

Weikleenget, a former Houston resident, said he would vote for Metro's plan if he
still lived in Houston.

"I know what it's like with all the freeways down there," he said. "They need a
way to move people faster."


The battle over rail has been waged for three decades in Houston. But if there's
one place that can top the nasty transit politics, it's Los Angeles. The City of
Angels is often compared to the Bayou City, sort of like a big brother of urban
sprawl, gigantic freeways, traffic congestion, air pollution and automobile
dependency.

The key difference is that since 1990, California's largest city has opened 56
miles of light rail, a 16-mile subway and a six-county commuter rail system. The
latest light rail segment, the Gold Line to Pasadena, opened in July.

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority trains carry nearly a
quarter-million riders a day, and the Metrolink commuter lines ferry 35,000
passengers to and from distant suburbs. To stand in Union Station during the
afternoon rush is to risk being knocked over by a horde of commuters scrambling
out of the subway to catch one of the double-decker Metrolink trains.

"For those of us who are coming in from the valleys, this is actually much faster
and easier for us than sitting on the freeway," said Jerri Potras, en route home to
the San Gabriel Valley. "Give it a try. It's wonderful."

it's a sight many in Los Angeles still can't believe.

"We used to hear, 'Nobody will ride rail in L.A.' That voice is silent," said Roger
Christiansen, a transit activist who serves on the MTA's Citizens Advisory
Council. "Rail has changed Los Angeles. It has made the city much more
walkable, much more accessible."

Still, the 72-mile local rail system covers only a piece of the nation's most
populous county, and its impact on traffic is arguable.

"We're not offering a cure for congestion," Christiansen said. "We're offering an
alternative, a pleasant alternative."

The path to rail in the city where traffic is the nation's worst has been anything
but pleasant, however. Start-up in the 1990s was a disaster, with every line
costing several times the initial budget and being completed years late. The MTA
halted work on the Gold Line in 1998, and the state created a special authority to
finish it.

Roger Snoble, the CEO lured recently from Dallas, appears to have turned
things around. But despite the progress, rail critics still abound. They argue,
among other things, that the high cost of rail hurts the bus system. The MTA is
under a 1996 court order to improve bus service.

"The cost of one rail line absorbs the subsidy that could serve many, many bus
lines," said Jim Moore, a professor of transportation engineering at the University
of Southern California. "You invest in rail, you reduce total transit ridership. It
happened in Miami, it happened here, and it will happen in Houston."

John Catoe, MTA's deputy CEO, acknowledged that the bus system was
neglected. But, he said, the authority has made major improvements, including
the recent launch of six long-distance rapid bus lines that are "having a good
impact on congestion and traffic movement."

Tom Rubin, a former L.A. transit executive turned consultant, said the new buses
are more efficient than the rail lines, but people are not about to give up their
cars.

"Keep spending the money on roads," he said. "That's what's carrying well over
95 percent of all person trips and 100 percent of the freight trips."

Those riding the trains mostly favor transit expansion over more roads, but they
question how well MTA has done to date.

Tony Banash, who makes a two-hour commute between Long Beach and the
San Fernando Valley on two trains and a bus, said Houston voters shouldn't
support a bad plan. The Blue Line, taking an hour to cover its 22-mile route,
resembles the system Metro is planning. The Green and Gold lines, on the other
hand, mostly have an exclusive right of way and travel much faster.

"The street running has been an endless nightmare," Banash said as his Blue
Line train crawled through dilapidated neighborhoods south of downtown L.A.
"Don't build it in the street."

This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2164522



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 18, 2003


Transit plans often hard sell to voters

By LUCAS WALL


Convincing American voters to approve a transit-expansion referendum is no
easy task.

At least 28 governments held elections within the past year that involved extra
funding for mass transit. Only 12 of those measures passed -- and one of those
was later struck down by a court.

While polls in Houston show support for the Metropolitan Transit Authority's Nov.
4 transit-expansion proposition, transit officials realize they have a tough sell.
The "Metro Solutions" plan includes a $640 million bond issue to accelerate
construction of the next 22 miles of light rail, a 73-mile rail system blueprint, 44
new bus routes, expanded HOV lanes and $774 million in new roadwork.

Voters in Orange County, Fla., rejected a similar multimodal referendum Oct. 7.
The proposed 1/2-cent sales-tax increase would have raised $2.6 billion over 20
years to start a light rail system, widen highways and build bike paths and
sidewalks. Pre-Election Day polls had indicated the "Mobility 20/20" plan would
pass.

But many Orlando voters refused to swallow what they considered a poison pill --
Mobility 20/20 would have used some of the new sales-tax revenue to add four
express toll lanes to interstate 4 next to the current eight free lanes. Many voters
also expressed disapproval of light rail, which they had rejected in 1997.

Nine transit referendums took place in North Texas last month. Voters in three
Denton County cities approved a 1/2-cent sales tax to help fund light rail to
Dallas. Five cities rejected the proposal, however, and voters in Lake Worth
decided to pull out of the Fort Worth Transportation Authority.

Metro has one big advantage over other entities: it is not asking voters to raise
taxes. The authority already has a full penny sales tax, the envy of most transit
agencies, which get by with a quarter- or half-cent. Metro says it can fund the
proposed $4.6 billion expansion using bonds, federal grants and existing tax
revenue.

Nearly every other transit referendum during the past year has included a tax
hike, a tough sell to voters in tough economic times.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2163857



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Sun. Oct. 19, 2003

LETTERS POLICY: We welcome and encourage letters from readers. Letters
can be mailed to Viewpoints, C/O Houston Chronicle, P.O. Box 4260, Houston,
Texas 77210. Letters may also be sent by e-mail to viewpoints@chron.com or by
fax to 713-220-3575. Letters must include the name, address and telephone
numbers for verification purposes only. All letters are subject to editing.

NEW OUTLOOK ADDRESS: Readers interested in expressing their opinions
and views in Outlook may now send essays to our new e-mail address
outlook@chron.com. Op-ed pieces can still be submitted by fax at 713-220-3575
or by regular mail to the Houston Chronicle, P.O. Box 4260, 77210, attention
Outlook Editor.




=PTP=============================================

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/1017lightrailside17.ht
ml

Arizona Republic
Oct. 17, 2003

Light rail can be boon to retailers

Jonathan J. Higuera

For businesses that survive the construction of the light-rail system, the final
outcome could be lucrative.

Studies of economic development opportunities near light-rail projects generally
show rising property values for both residences and businesses near light-rail
stations. Rail projects also tend to attract commercial and mixed-use
development projects.

"Light rail clearly signals to business and developers that the public sector is
making a major investment in that community," said Robert Dunphy, a senior
fellow at the Urban Land institute in Washington, D.C. "Developers like to see
that kind of investment. That gives them confidence going forward."

That said, commercial and mixed-use development is by no means a given.
Some areas need incentives beyond the transit system to transform. Special tax
districts, economic incentives and housing subsidies are among the strategies
some cities have used, Dunphy said.

"In some places, a transit system is all you need to turn it around. That may not
be enough in some areas."

Dunphy, who served on the Urban Land institute panel analyzing Phoenix's
redevelopment opportunities along the light-rail line, said several Valley areas
have strong potential for increased commercial development. It described
Central Avenue and Camelback as a potential "crown jewel," while several
stations along the Washington Street corridor also had strong redevelopment
potential.

Other stops may need help to spur the desired redevelopment.

in Salt Lake City, which completed its line in 1999, anecdotal evidence shows
downtown businesses near the light-rail stops have fared well, said Bill Knowles,
a consultant who has worked with Salt Lake business owners.

"You won't find anyone who will say it's been bad for business," he said. "Some
will say they don't know if it's been good and others definitively say it's been
good."

A University of North Texas study of Dallas' light-rail system found rising property
values and increased sales for businesses near stations.

The potential has some speculators looking for spots to buy along the Valley line.

"We keep hearing from people who are speculating along the line, both for
residential and commercial," Valley Metro Rail spokeswoman Daina Mann said.
"It's not surprising. You just have to look at the statistics from other cities."



=PTP============================================

Salt Lake Tribune
THURSDAY October 16, 2003

UTA looking to grease rights of way


[PHOTO]
Lona Mae Lauritzen watches I-15 traffic from her light-rail car in 2000. Expansion
of commuter rail along the Wasatch Front could require state overrides of local
planners, the UTA says. (Trent Nelson/Salt Lake Tribune file photo)


By Joe Baird

    With the pressure on to complete the first leg of a commuter rail system and
several light rail spurs in the next decade, Utah Transit Authority officials told
state lawmakers Wednesday that they need to be able to work unimpeded to
complete the projects in a timely manner.
    To that end, the UTA wants an interlocal agreement that will exempt the transit
provider from local planning and zoning regulations in railway corridors. Failing
that, the UTA will seek legislation that provides such an exemption.
    "We believe we already have an exemption; we believe we can build tracks in
the corridors. We're just trying to strengthen that," said Mike Allegra, the UTA's
director of rail operations. "What we don't want to happen is to get into building a
line and have somebody say 'Hey, wait a minute,' and try to stop it."
    UTA counsel Katherine Pett says the exemption would apply only to rail
corridors the UTA already owns or shares with Union Pacific Railroad. She told
legislators the construction impact on cities and towns along the lines would be
minimal.
    "These are areas that have been historically used by railroads. We're not
changing that," Pett told members of the Political Subdivisions interim
Committee. "In many cases, we're not even adding track. All we'd be doing is
improving infrastructure."
    As has been the case in past light rail projects, she said, the UTA would
continue to be guided by local regulations in the construction of train stations and
park-and-ride lots.

    However, Jodi Hoffman, legislative lobbyist for the Utah League of Cities and
Towns, cautioned against providing the UTA a blank right-of-way check.
    "While the rail corridors exist, they do not exist in the intensity that they will
when light rail and commuter rail begin running," she said. "is it the city's burden
to build something like sound walls? Or is it the burden of the Wasatch Front
Regional Council? There are potential unintended consequences here that UTA
might not see."
   Still, Hoffman says she is optimistic that the UTA and the cities and towns
along the route will be able to work things out without resorting to legislation. So
are state lawmakers.
    Commuter and light rail "are perceived as benefits to the communities; they're
not being imposed on anybody," said Sen. Greg Bell, R-Fruit Heights. "To the
degree that there is a disparate impact, it can be addressed."
    jbaird@sltrib.com



=PTP=================================================

http://www.news8austin.com/content/your_news/default.asp?ArID=86521

News 8 Austin
10/15/2003

Envision Central Texas: Scenario D

By: Antonio Castelan and Web staff

Central Texas' population is exploding. In the next 20 to 40 years, the population
is expected to swell from 1.4 million to 2.5 million.

Envision Central Texas (ECT) has spent the past two years working with
communities across the five counties, gathering citizen input on how best the
expected growth should be distributed and managed.

They have come up with four scenarios that consider land use, transportation,
and the environment.


 Scenario focuses on redevelopment within Austin's city limits.
Scenario D is exact opposite of Scenario A; there's urban renewal instead of
urban sprawl.

Development would be concentrated within city of Austin limits, not rural areas
and outlying counties.

Only 85,000 acres of rural areas would be developed, so the small towns of
Central Texas would remain so.

Scenario D changes neighborhoods by replacing older properties with
condominiums, apartments and lofts, much like the Warehouse District.

More people would live in condos and apartments (52 percent) than single-family
houses (48 percent).

Dianna Lewis is executive director of the Neighborhood Housing Services of
Austin, a nonprofit neighborhood housing service focusing on helping first time
home buyers.


[GRAPHIC]
  Austin development
Scenario D focuses on building in Austin and rebuilding some city infrastructure.



She believes in the idea of redeveloping old neighborhoods, as long as residents
remain a part of the planning process.

"Neighbors in the area continued to be a part of that process. That their views or
desires were respected as part of that process," she said.

Scenario D invests the most in transportation and the least in roads, as the
suburbs won't be developed there won't be new roads of expansion projects of
existing ones.

Cars would be less depended on, and the average morning rush hour time would
be 18 minutes.

An extensive bus and light rail system would be in place, along with a $100
million biking and pedestrian system.

East Austin activist Chris Johnson sees some pluses to this type of growth.

"It brings jobs, economic development, but by the same token I just have to
reiterate all the neighbors in the community have to come together," he said.

Johnson is seeing his neighborhood change with the 11th Street Revitalization
Project underway.

"The property value goes up. The demand goes up, then so do their property
values. I have mixed reviews about development," he said.

The Edwards Aquifer would see 397 acres developed, a little more than the 53
acres under Scenario C, but much less than A's 36,000 and B's 19,000.

Three billion would be spent to revamp infrastructure, the cheapest price tag out
of the four scenarios.



=PTP============================================

[BATN]

Silicon Valley Biz ink
Friday, September 12, 2003

Forum rekindles smart-growth discussion

By Radhika Kaushik


Renewed talks about the role of smart growth in urban planning aim to
bring proponents and opponents together to build consensus on a topic
viewed by some Bay Area planning organizations as critical to San
Jose.


The Commonwealth Club Silicon Valley and San Jose Downtown
Association recently sponsored a forum about the proposed Tamien
project -- a stalled urban development near the Tamien Light Rail
station, just south of downtown San Jose. The San Jose City Council
has been wrestling with a proposal to build two 11-story residential
high-rises near the transit route.


"There are a lot of different stakeholders [in the Tamien project]
who do not have a shared idea of how to get there, which [prompted]
the Commonwealth Club to host this forum," says councilwoman Cindy
Chavez.


The principles of smart growth -- a return to pre-World War II,
compact communities and mixed-use projects that incorporate both
retail and housing -- are gaining acceptance in many Bay Area cities.


San Jose, for example, wants to create more opportunities for people
to live downtown in mixed-use developments. The city aims to create a
culturally vibrant downtown community and provide residents with
different housing options. In addition, the city believes denser
housing downtown would make the San Jose transit system more viable
and decrease dependence on cars.


The plans also include bicycle trails.


This hunky-dory vision of a tightly knit urban community has some
opponents bristling over what they believe is city planners'
disregard for practicalities. They don't buy into smart-growth
advocates' pretty picture of integrated neighborhoods. Instead, they
say smart growth increases traffic congestion, air pollution and
housing costs, and leaves less open space.


Randal O'Toole, an economist with the Thoreau institute in Oregon,
has been battling what he calls "smart-growth myths" for years. He
believes much smart-growth planning is skewed by development
interests and planners who decide for everyone "how they should
live."


"They hate anyone with quarter-acre plots. [Planners] will put
transportation dollars into [expensive] rail transit. Bus transit is
cheaper, but then they want to stop building highways," says O'Toole.


However, Jessica Fitchen, South Bay field representative for the
Greenbelt Alliance, a nonprofit urban-planning organization, holds up
Morgan Hill as a shining example of smart planning in action. In that
city, there is a move to add housing in the downtown core, which
would create a safer and more active downtown area, Fitchen says.


Similar trends in San Jose, Santa Clara, Palo Alto and other cities
speak volumes about smart-growth momentum, she says.


"[Opponents of smart growth] are running scared. They're seeing that
the models of the post-war [era] have turned out to be a fraud. You
can't have open lots and freeways forever," Fitchen says.


However, San Jose is moving toward smart growth with several mixed-
use projects completed downtown. Many of these projects are geared
toward affluent residents.


"In San Jose, the majority of housing is single-family lots. We're
trying to create housing for other segments of our society, more in a
cultural center and for people who are attracted to that kind of
living," says Laurel Prevetti, deputy director of planning services
for San Jose. "Downtown [San Jose] already has a lot of housing for
lower income people and we need newer housing to attract high-income
people to balance that."


Walnut Creek is one Bay Area city that has incorporated mixed-use
projects. Mayor Gwen Regalia says community dialogue is instrumental
in the successful adoption of smart-growth principles.


"There are some opposed to smart growth. But we created the Citizens
institutes, which for the past three years have been explaining to
the community [what] we are trying to accomplish," she says.


The Citizens institutes are workshops that explain the city's urban-
planning activities to interested citizens.



Radhika Kaushik is a Biz ink reporter.
You can reach her at .



=PTP==============================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/144337_millionbet17.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Friday, October 17, 2003

Sound Transit makes $1 million bet on commuter train

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER STAFF

Sound Transit's finance committee yesterday risked $1 million to try to keep alive
its promise that a Sounder commuter rail train will be running between Seattle
and Everett by the end of the year.

Sound Transit and Burlington Northern Santa Fe agreed earlier this year on the
general outlines and price for getting commuter trains running on Burlington
Northern's tracks. But they said there would be two more months of negotiations
to nail down the fine points.

Those negotiations are running behind schedule. Sound Transit officials say
there are no particular barriers to agreement, just lots of complex issues to work
out.

But repairs necessary to get the first train running will take about two months to
finish and must be started soon if service is to start before the end of the year,
Sounder Director Martin Minkoff said.

The finance committee yesterday agreed to allow Burlington Northern to make
improvements costing no more than $1 million even though the final agreement
hasn't been signed. If negotiations fail, Sound Transit still must pay the railroad
for the work.

Minkoff said both sides are negotiating in good faith. Finance Committee Chair
Kevin Phelps said Sound Transit has a lot of money invested in getting the line
up and running. Both Sound Transit and Burlington Northern would have "a PR
problem" if negotiations fell through, he said.



=PTP===========================================

[BATN]

Toledo Blade
Tuesday, October 14, 2003

Lake Twp. to test alert horns at rail crossings

Automatic system may lessen use of whistles


By David Pathc
Blade Staff Writer


The sound of a locomotive horn wailing across the moonlit countryside
may be a part of rural Americana, but it can be a noisy nuisance for
people who live near main line tracks.


A new technology that could alert motorists at railroad crossings
while reducing the frequency of train horns is likely to get its
first Ohio test sometime in the next year or so at three crossings in
Lake Township, just west of Millbury.


But during the testing period, the automated, pole-mounted horn
system to be installed at Bradner, Ayers, and Matthews road crossings
will mean more noise -- not less. That's because passing trains will
continue to sound their horns at the same time the pole-mounted
system is operating.


The system sounds an electronic rendition of a train horn from
speakers that are mounted toward road traffic. Motorists will hear a
much louder warning than from a passing locomotive, while most homes
and businesses in the area are expected to receive much less noise
from the system.


"Elimination of train whistling is an ultimate goal of the
technology," said Kurt Anderson, a spokesman for Railroad Controls,
L.P., the Benbrook, Texas, manufacturer.


The roadside devices have indicator lamps pointed toward the tracks
so that when they are substituted for train horns, engineers will
know they are working properly. If the indicator does not illuminate,
the engineer will blow the train's horn approaching the crossing.


But Susan Kirkland, manager of safety programs for the Ohio Rail
Development Commission, said that for for now, the roadside horns
will be used as a supplemental safety device and not as a substitute
for engineers sounding the trains' horns.


"It will be a warning for the second train" that can be hidden from
motorists by a train passing through on a parallel set of tracks, Ms.
Kirkland said. That is why three crossings in Lake Township -- where
the railroad has three parallel tracks -- were chosen for the test
instead of communities with numerous crossings such as Perrysburg or
Fostoria.


Once the automated horns' reliability is proven, and federal
regulations are changed to allow "quiet zones," then they might
replace train whistles at horn-equipped crossings in Ohio, Ms.
Kirkland said.


"it's in the very early phases of testing nationwide," said Rudy
Husband, spokesman for the Norfolk Southern railroad, whose tracks
the three test-site roads cross.


Cassi Krantz, who lives next to the tracks on Bradner Road, is less
than enthusiastic about adding the roadside horns to the train horns
during the test.


"There's enough noise here as it is, anyway," she said, though she
added that after eight years' at the residence, she's fairly
accustomed to the trains.


Two other Lake Township residents who live farther from the rails
said they too are used to train whistles, and believe safety should
be paramount.


"My husband used to be an engineer, and he hit quite a few cars over
the years," said Linda Gilley of Ayers Road. "He's all for anything
they can do to make cars more aware, and so am i."


"Whatever seems to be the safest" is what should be done, said Jim
Ayers, who lives two doors down on the family farm across the tracks
from the Gilleys.


The Ayers crossing was the scene of a fatal crash Sept. 29, 2000,
when a car driven by Joseph Abraham, 17, a Lake High student, failed
to yield and was struck by a train. At the time of his death, the
crossing had only crossbuck signs. Warning lights and gates were
installed there and at Matthews Road in early 2002, and gates were
added at Bradner Road.


The rail commission has budgeted up to $200,000 for the three Lake
Township devices. Railroad Controls estimates the cost for a typical
crossing at $55,000 to $60,000.


The first use of a roadside horn began nine years ago in Gearing,
Neb., Mr. Anderson said. The devices have since been tested in
California, Kansas, iowa, Texas, and illinois.


The Northwestern University Center for Public Safety, which evaluated
the system's use at two crossings in the Chicago suburb of Mundelein,
ill., found that grade-crossing violations declined by 68 percent
when the roadside horns were used, and that overall horn noise
declined by 80 percent in the surrounding area.


The crossings' circuitry is designed for the system to activate 25
seconds before a train gets to the road, no matter what its speed.








PTP 2003/10/18-A = CONTENTS

* Amtrak reports record ridership for 2003
   Metro October 17, 2003

* Austin: LRT vital to city's development, says Dallas developer
   AMERICAN-STATESMAN Thursday, October 16, 2003

* Austin: 'Scenario C' envisions regional rail, no LRT, more rural growth
   News 8 Austin 10/14/2003

* Tucson: Despite denials, sprawl builders' group funds anti-rail effort
   Tucson Citizen Saturday, October 11, 2003

* Seattle-Everett regional rail service may roll
   Seattle Times Friday, October 17, 2003

* Seattle: Suburban mayor vows to fight rail transit
   Daily Journal of Commerce October 16, 2003

* Seattle monorail: Budget woes threaten major station
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, October 17, 2003

* Seattle monorail: New survey shows support for finishing project
   SEATTLE MONORAIL PROJECT Date: 10/16/2003

* LA op-ed: Costly subway would imperil Gold Line LRT
   Los Angeles Times Monday, October 13, 2003

* San Jose mayor backs BART rail extension to city
   San Jose El Observador Friday, October 10, 2003


=PTP===============================================

http://www.metro-magazine.com/t_newspick.cfm?id=9056995

Metro
October 17, 2003

Amtrak reports record ridership for 2003

More than 24 million passengers traveled on Amtrak in 2003, 2.7% more
than in 2002, the railroad said Wednesday.

Amtrak attributed the overall positive results to lower fares, increased
number of trains and upgraded service amenities.

Despite the number of adverse conditions this year, including a lagging
economy that has hurt the travel industry overall, the iraq war, the
Northeast blackout and Hurricane isabel.

Amtrak's ridership topped the previous record of the 23.5 million
passengers set in 2001 and was 2.7% better than last year's result of 23.4
million.

Long-distance trains showed substantial improvement over the last year,
with those in the Eastern region of the country improving ridership by
3.8% and those in the Western region improving by 6.6%.



=PTP================================================

http://www.statesman.com/business/content/auto/epaper/editions/today/b
usiness_fe6e332ad10b2.html;COXnetJSessionID=1Pon3Cf9wHWKgMtr2
9xnXetJyXDJwi6AFzdefjkMtKkvz8splb6V!-
1743610163?urac=n&urvf=10663958158030.8599724143424331#

AMERICAN-STATESMAN
Thursday, October 16, 2003

Light-rail system is vital to Austin's development, Dallas transit expert says


By R. Michelle Breyer
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

An audience packed with builders, developers, and other business and
civic leaders heard a tough message Wednesday: Austin is losing out by
not having light rail.

"You've got to get with this," said Kenneth Hughes, president of Kenneth
Hughes Inc., a Dallas firm that specializes in transit-related developments.
"Austin has more to offer a rail system -- and a rail system has more to
offer Austin -- than any city in the United States today," he said at a
luncheon sponsored by the Urban Land institute.

Developers of major transit-related projects in Dallas said light rail there
has been a major catalyst for development, despite the recent economic
downturn. They said their projects would not have happened without light
rail. The stations become nodes for development, attracting people who
like the idea of being able to live, work and shop without needing a car.

Hughes recently built Mockingbird Station atop a Dallas Area Rapid
Transit light-rail station, where a former warehouse complex now includes
apartments, stores, a theater and offices. In Plano, light rail drew Amicus
Partners to develop an apartment, theater and retail project that has
awakened the downtown.

But major transit projects can be a tough sell. In 2000, Austin voters
narrowly defeated a referendum on light rail. Some opponents argued that
light rail wouldn't relieve enough congestion to merit the billions of dollars
it would cost, while others feared it might bring unwanted development to
their communities.

But in Houston, a new 7.5-mile Main Line light-rail system between
downtown and Reliant Park will open Jan. 1. Next month, voters will
decide whether to add 22 miles to the system, an issue that has become
the hottest topic in the city's mayoral race.

Guy Hagstette, director of capital projects and planning for the Houston
Downtown Management District, said city leaders see the Main Street
system as a way to rejuvenate a major urban corridor. It has taken years
to accomplish, but in the end, he says he thinks it will be worth it.

"At the end of the day, the story isn't about light rail so much as creating a
great urban corridor: re-creating an urban city in the heart of Houston," he
said.

Jim Skaggs, who ran the anti-rail campaign in Austin, questioned the
feasibility of rail systems in light of what he said are a declining number of
commuters.

Hughes and other developers who spoke at the luncheon disputed that
claim, arguing that light-rail projects in other cities have attracted a legion
of commuters who never used the bus system.

"I hear that statistic periodically, but if you test it against what's happening
in the cities that have put in rail systems, you have seen an increase in
transit usage in all those cities," Hughes said.

Rather than fighting efforts to create a rail system, Austin should work for
a rail system that meets the needs of the city and its residents, Hughes
said. He urged city leaders to begin with a small starter system rather than
do nothing.

"The message here is to get yourself together and decide what you want
your (transit) system to do," Hughes said. "But start it, because you won't
be sorry."




=PTP================================================

http://www.news8austin.com/content/special_coverage/news_8_town_hall
/?ArID=86435&SecID=381

Envision Central Texas: Scenario C

 News 8 Austin
10/14/2003

By: Antonio Castelan and Web staff

Central Texas' population is exploding. In the next 20 to 40 years, the
population is expected to swell from 1.4 million to 2.5 million.

Envision Central Texas (ECT) has spent the past two years working with
communities across the five counties, gathering citizen input on how best
the expected growth should be distributed and managed.

They have come up with four scenarios that consider land use,
transportation, and the environment.


Scenario C calls for growth to spread to more rural areas.


Bastrop, Hays and Caldwell County would have major population booms,
and new communities would develop near major roads.

Towns such as Elgin, Hutto, Lockhart and Taylor would become more
suburban, with populations reaching 100,000.

The plan calls for more mixed-use developments, with fewer families in
single-family houses and more in apartments and condominiums.

That also means that more undeveloped land would be protected and
remain and the new developments would be established near main roads.


Scenario C doesn't include a light rail system, but it would have an
extensive commuter rail line that runs from Georgetown to San Marcos
and throughout the Austin area.

it also calls for $100 million for walking and biking facilities and $4.9 billion
for new sewer and water lines (less than Scenario A's $10.6 billion, but
more than Scenario D's $3 billion).

With mixed-use developments, transportation time would be cut because
people wouldn't have to travel as far.

Only 23 percent of land would be urbanized, a number worth welcoming
for environmentalists.



[GRAPHIC]
    Scenario C
Elgin and other small towns would change under Scenario C.


Fifty-three acres (0.1 square miles) of the Edwards Aquifer would be
developed, the least of the four scenarios.

Homebuilders find that hard to imagine.

"There would only be 57 houses built on the aquifer, so that's 20 to 50
houses, and again that not realistic. We will do that in six months this
year," Austin Homebuilders Association executive vice-president Harry
Savio said.

Scenario C is more of a middle ground.

Scenario A continues growth without implementing change. Scenario B
includes a light rail but only modifies ideas of land use. Scenario D
focuses on redeveloping urban and suburban areas, not developing new
areas.



=PTP=================================================

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/index.php?page=local&story_id=101103a1_
transplan

Tucson Citizen
Saturday, October 11, 2003


SAHBA puts bucks against transit plan

New campaign finance reports show that the builders association is the
largest contributor to a group opposing the Nov. 4 ballot proposal.


GARRY DUFFY


Although the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association said it isn't
taking a position on a transportation initiative on the city's November
ballot, new campaign finance reports show it is the largest contributor to
an opposition group.

The plan calls for upgrades to bus and other transit services, the
maintenance of neighborhood streets and the installation of a 13-mile
light-rail line through midtown. It would be funded by a three-tenths-of-a-
cent sales tax increase and an increase in the city's construction sales tax
to 6 percent from 2 percent. The increases would remain in place for 20
years.

On Oct. 6, Carole Pawlak, president of the builders group, said in the
Tucson Citizen that the association wasn't taking a position but had
concerns about the funding mechanism.

By an Aug. 31 campaign finance reporting deadline, the association had
contributed $14,500 to the Committee for Real Regional Transportation,
which opposes the transportation plan and its funding mechanism.

As of Thursday's midway deadline for campaign finance disclosure, the
builders group had given $22,500 to the transportation committee,
campaign finance records showed.

Officials from the builders group did not return phone calls yesterday.

Opponents of the plan have raised $40,000, with the largest contributors
being the builders.

Supporters of the transportation plan by Citizens for a Sensible
Transportation Solution said they expect to be outspent several times over
by critics of their plan.

The election will be Nov. 4.

Spokesman Stephen Farley said Citizens for a Sensible Transportation
Solution began collecting money in February 2002 from mostly individuals.

it had raised $38,500 as of Thursday.

Committee for Real Regional Transportation Chairman John Carlson Sr.
said yesterday the group would continue to seek money to help fight the
transportation plan and tax increases.

"We would like to be able to raise more," Carlson said.

Of the six contributors listed by plan opponents in Thursday's filings, one
was an individual contributor, William A. Estes Jr., a home builder. He
gave $5,000.

The other five were the builders association, Chestnut Construction Corp.,
Arizona Builders Alliance, The Kemmerly Co. and T.L. Roof and
Associates Construction Co.

Both committees involved in the ballot issue are political action
committees, so campaign contribution limits don't apply.

Citizens for a Sensible Transportation Solution listed about 120
contributors. All but a few were individuals.

Topping its list was the Sierra Club's Rincon Group at $1,500.

Anthony Haswell, who listed himself as retired, gave the most to the group
as an individual, $2,200.




=PTP=============================================

Seattle Times
Friday, October 17, 2003

Offer may get Everett Sounder service rolling

By Mike Lindblom
Seattle Times staff reporter


in an effort to keep its promise of commuter-rail service to Everett, Sound
Transit has offered to front $1 million for track improvements in
Snohomish County — even though there's no long-term contract yet for
Sounder trains to use the regional freight corridor there.

The deal would allow the first demonstration train to make one daily round
trip between Everett and Seattle by Dec. 31, a pledge Sound Transit
made last spring.

"There is no more fundamental issue to Snohomish County residents'
support of Sound Transit than getting Sounder going from Everett to
Seattle on a daily basis," board member Mark Olson said after the Sound
Transit finance committee approved the offer yesterday. Olson is an
Everett city councilman.

Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway owns the tracks.

"We would like to work with Sound Transit to move a train by the end of
the year if definitive long-term agreements are completed," railway
spokesman Gus Melonas said late yesterday. "However, we will not
discuss further details of negotiations."

in May, more than six years after voters approved a regional transit plan
that included commuter rail to Everett, the transit agency announced an
agreement in principle with the railway.

At a cost to taxpayers of $250 million for additional tracks, signals and
other improvements, the railway would let Sounder make four daily round
trips for 99 years.

But talks since spring have yet to produce a final agreement. The sides
are still discussing issues such as train timetables, construction deadlines
and who would pay if environmental-protection costs soar, officials said.

A 120-day bargaining deadline was extended to Dec. 1, which would be
too late for inaugural train service this year.

To get the trains moving sooner, Sound Transit wants Burlington Northern
Santa Fe to perform limited track work ahead of time — such as
constructing short rail segments that line up with the Everett and
Edmonds station platforms, said Sounder director Marty Minkoff.

if Sound Transit ultimately walks away from the broader $250 million deal,
it would have to reimburse the railway up to $1 million.

Finance chairman Kevin Phelps and others said that was a chance worth
taking. The agency has already invested millions in design and stations.

Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com



=PTP=============================================

Daily Journal of Commerce
October 16, 2003


Some see BNSF corridor as best chance for Eastside light rail line


But Renton's mayor says he'll put up a fight


By MARC STILES
Journal Staff Reporter



The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway's interest in selling a rail
corridor that traverses the Eastside is stoking passions from Renton
to Redmond, but not everyone is on the same track.


At one end of the argument are proponents of commuter and light rail
who relish the thought of having an existing corridor. At the other
is Jesse Tanner, the feisty mayor of Renton who curses the concept
that could result in frequent trains running through the heart of his
city.


A BNSF spokesperson confirms the railroad is interested in selling
the roughly 40 miles of single track that starts at the Black River
just north of Auburn and runs through Renton, Kirkland and
Woodinville before terminating in Snohomish.


The railroad "is always studying the status of various lines of low
profitability systemwide," said BNSF spokesman Gus Melonas. "One area
under current review is the Woodinville line."


According to Melonas, the line accommodates an average of two freight
trains a day, as well as the Spirit of Washington Dinner Train.


BNSF has asked the Washington State Department of Transportation
about buying the line, but state officials are unsure how they'll
respond.


"We're just trying to formulate how we would even go into discussions
with them or if we should," said DOT spokeswoman Linda Mullen. The
Legislature would have to act since the state has no money earmarked
for the purchase.


"it's way too early for us to know if this is a yes or no
proposition, if DOT should be involved or if it's a role for somebody
else," Mullen said.


The folks at Transportation Choices think someone should jump in.


"The sale of this right of way is an incredible opportunity for the
region to provide an alternative means in the congested interstate
405 corridor," said Kevin Shively, policy director of the group that
is advocating what it calls low-cost commuter rail in the corridor.


The group thinks the line eventually could be upgraded for light rail
or monorail. "The key is buy the right of way now to keep costs low,"
Shively said.


Transportation Choices is advocating what it calls Eastside Rail
Express -- frequent, all-day transit service using self-powered,
diesel rail passenger cars, with service to Tukwila, Renton, Port
Quendall, Bellevue, South Kirkland, downtown Kirkland, Totem Lake and
Woodinville. According to the group, the estimated capital cost,
which excludes purchase of the right of way, is $250 million to $300
million.


Redmond Mayor Rosemarie ives says she is definitely interested.
Tanner, her counterpart in Renton, is not.


"I think it's a lousy idea," Tanner said. "We let people know we
don't want that damned railroad line used as a rapid transit line."


The mayor said the line would cut downtown Renton in two and affect
other city neighborhoods.


in May 2001, the city passed a resolution outlining Renton's
concerns, and remains opposed. "It may have hardened a bit in the
interim," Tanner said.


He added that if WSDOT starts negotiating with the railroad "to
procure this damned right of way," Renton will withdraw its support
for the recently approved $4.7 billion plan to increase capacity on I-
405.


Tanner said the corridor could be used as a pedestrian and bicycle
corridor but nothing else. "If they go beyond that, they lose us and
they lose us in a hurry. We are not only opposed to it, we will fight
it."


Earlier this month, the I-405 Executive Committee, made up of elected
representatives from the Eastside, endorsed a $4.7 billion plan to
improve the freeway, one of the state's most congested roads. The
plan calls for new lanes and park-and-ride lots.


Sound Transit, the regional agency that operates commuter rail,
regional express bus service and a light rail line in Tacoma, has
looked at the Eastside rail proposal in the past. The corridor is not
part of the agency's current 10-year program, Sound Move, but could
be incorporated in a future ballot measure for voters to decide, said
Sound Transit spokesman Geoff Patrick.




=PTP=============================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/144280_monorail17.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Friday, October 17, 2003

Mariners make strong pitch for Safeco rail stop


By KERY MURAKAMi
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

in terms as subtle as a chin-high fastball, the Mariners made it clear to
monorail officials they want a station at Safeco Field.

The Seattle Monorail Authority is considering postponing the construction
of a station next to the ballpark, but yesterday, the Mariners wrote in a
letter, "We are strongly opposed to deletion of the Safeco Field station."

The team said monorail backers had advertised a station serving the
stadium during last year's initiative campaign for the $1.75 billion Ballard-
to-West Seattle line.

"The deletion of a Safeco Field station is inconsistent with the voter-
approved plan," the letter said.

The letter from Clyde Maciver, Mariner executive vice president and
general counsel, also questioned whether as many people going to
Mariner games would take the monorail if they had to get on and off at the
next closest station at King Street.

"If the station is not perceived as close and convenient, fewer people will
ride the Monorail. Based on the Monorail's own ridership estimates for
baseball fans, any reduction in ridership casts serious doubts on the
project's financial viability."

Tax revenue for the monorail is coming in 30 percent below expectations.

in the letter, Maciver continued: "The Monorail project is already under
financial stress due to the loss of revenue from car licensing fees. The
additional loss of fare box revenue due to the loss of ballpark ridership will
only exacerbate the Monorail's financial problems."

The Mariners made the letter public yesterday, even as the monorail
authority released the results of a poll, claiming to show "tremendous"
citywide support for the project that barely squeaked by in last year's
elections.

Critics questioned whether the poll was a $20,000 attempt by the agency
to bolster its public image in light of vocal critics. And the dispute over
Safeco Field illustrates how tenuous that support might be.

Monorail Executive Director Joel Horn said the agency is not
contemplating delaying a stadium station to save money. Rather, it is
studying whether the line needs separate stations at King Street and at
Safeco Field, because of the crowds that might pack the platforms after
games. Having fans walk the nearly half-mile to King Street would mean
crowds would not get to the platform at the same time, because people
walk at different speeds, monorail officials have said.

Horn, however, insisted, "We're still going to serve Safeco Field. The only
question is where."

Monorail strategic planning director Anne Levinson said whether the
monorail would lose riders by postponing a stadium station "is exactly
what we're studying." The agency's staff will make preliminary
recommendations next month, before the authority's board makes a final
decision in February or March.

The Mariners, however, still contend the voters were promised both the
King Street and Safeco Field stations.

"The availability of these two stations has been used throughout the
monorail project promotion to garner public support for the Green Line. ...
We can never know if voters would have approved the Monorail Plan
without a station at Safeco Field, as the prospect of deleting it surfaced 11
months after the vote," the letter said.

Mariner spokeswoman Rebecca Hale stopped short of saying that the
Mariners would call for the project to be sent back to the voters should the
stadium station be deleted. "We don't want this to be seen as us not
supporting the monorail. We're just trying to do what's best for the
monorail and the entire community."

Horn, meanwhile, said the dispute only proved the results of a poll,
purporting strong citywide support for the project.

"Everybody wants a monorail station, and they want one now," he said.
"It's NIMBYism in reverse."

The poll last week of 600 Seattle residents found, among other things,
that 83 percent support for other governments helping the monorail
authority build the planned 14-mile West Seattle-to-Ballard line on budget.
The poll had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage
points.

The poll comes as the project faces questions about its finances and
concerns about its impact on neighborhoods. At the same time, the
monorail authority is asking state licensing officials to crack down on
Seattle vehicle owners who are evading the monorail tax by registering
their cars outside of the city. The project is also facing increasing scrutiny
from City Council members, who will decide early next year whether to
allow the monorail to build on city property.

Critics accused the agency of spending $20,000 on a poll to bolster its
own image and put pressure on the state and the city.

"it's outrageous that the agency, at a time the agency is facing financial
difficulties, is spending our tax dollars on a poll that does nothing but elicit
the responses they are seeking," said Geof Logan, one of the authority's
most vocal critics.

Among other things, the poll asked, "Do you think plans for the new
Monorail are moving too slowly, too quickly, or are things on pace with
your expectations?" Forty-seven percent of those sampled said the
agency was moving too slowly, only 4 percent said it was moving too
quickly and 38 percent said the speed was just right.

A number of groups, including downtown business owners, urged the
agency this week to slow down and do more studies. Horn said the
agencies posed the question because the authority is thinking about
actually speeding up the project to save money.

But he said the poll also showed that if anything, most people want the
project to move faster.

"This is what I call a little children and puppies survey," Logan said. "Who
doesn't like children and little puppies?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P-I reporter Kery Murakami can be reached at 206-448-8131 or
kerymurakami@seattlepi.com



=PTP============================================

http://www.elevated.org/project/updates/update.asp?UpdateID=78

SEATTLE MONORAIL PROJECT
Date: 10/16/2003

1904 3rd Avenue, Suite 105
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: (206) 382-1220
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Media Contact: Anne Levinson , (206) 382-1220

Monorail Survey Results

NEWS ADVISORY

New survey shows Broad city-wide support for Monorail

Residents want city and state leaders to get behind project and make it
happen, speed up pace of project



Seattle – A new survey conducted by Evergreen Research Group for the
Seattle Monorail Project shows tremendous, widespread support for the
Monorail among all city neighborhoods, with residents urging city and
state leaders to ensure the project is built quickly and within budget.

Even residents who voted against the Monorail want to see elected
officials and city leaders get behind the Monorail and help get it built soon,
according to the findings.

Key findings of the survey include:

83 percent of respondents want government agencies and elected
officials to help ensure that the Monorail is built quickly and within budget.

Even of those respondents who voted "no" on the Monorail petition last
fall, 66 percent now say that other government agencies and elected
officials should help ensure the Monorail is built quickly and within budget.

The election was a year ago, many respondents have received their car
tax bills and there has been a great deal of media coverage about
revenue issues. Yet 70 percent of those surveyed – half of whom did not
vote for the Monorail last year – say it is important that the Monorail gets
built now that voters have approved it.

Despite the rapid pace of the Project, nearly half (47%) still feel the
Project is moving too slowly, 38 percent say it is on pace with their
expectations and only 4 percent say it is moving too quickly.


"The continued very strong support for the Monorail across the city is
pretty remarkable. The message is loud and clear. They want us – they
expect us - and our government partners to deliver on what they have
asked for, and to get it done soon" said Anne Levinson, Deputy Director of
the Monorail Project.

Levinson added, "We all knew a majority of voters had asked their
government to support the Monorail three times, but for most projects,
once tax bills arrive in the mail, support drops a bit. Monorail tax bills have
arrived, but the support remains as strong as ever. Even two-thirds of
those surveyed who voted against the Monorail last year are telling us it is
also important to them that the Monorail gets built, quickly and on budget."


Respondents Say What's important to Them

80% percent or more of respondents said it was important to them that
the Monorail will
provide a transit solution in Seattle

provide 2,000 family wage jobs during construction

improve the environment

be completed within the budget approved by the voters

connect with buses and light rail

be designed so that operating costs will break even

be above grade and not get stuck in traffic

minimize construction impacts

run every 4-5 minutes in rush hour

open by 2007

start construction within 18 months



Stopping Tax Evasion

More than three-quarters of those surveyed said it was important to them
that the State take steps to prevent car owners from evading the tax.
While only 11 percent of respondents say they know of people evading
the tax, 78 percent say they support requiring residents to register their
cars at their home address, 70% support assessing financial penalties
and nearly two-thirds support tightening up State laws.


Performance and Accountability

Despite current levels of public dissatisfaction with government and
wariness about the economy, only 20 percent felt the Monorail Project is
doing a poor or very poor job. 71 percent rated the agency as doing good,
fair or excellent.


About the Survey

The survey was conducted by telephone Oct. 3 – 9 among 600 Seattle
residents 16 years of age and older. The results have a margin of error of
plus/minus four percent.

The Seattle Monorail Project has made public involvement a hallmark of
its approach to decision-making, from opening a street level design studio
for the public to give input on station design as it is happening, to creating
a hotline and an email comment site (info@elevated.org), to holding
scores of meeting on topics such as diversity, the environment, the route,
jobs and design.

As part of its public outreach, The Seattle Monorail Project (SMP)
commissioned this city-wide survey to assess public priorities about the
Seattle Monorail Project, identify the public's information needs about the
Project and obtain input for upcoming decisions.

"We want all of those who are paying taxes and who will be riding the
Green Line to have a way to give us direct input," said Levinson. "We
know that lots of folks cannot make it to evening meetings or are not
comfortable using our website, so we are always looking for ways to get
their views."




=PTP===========================================

[BATN]

Los Angeles Times
Monday, October 13, 2003

Opinion

Sales-tax increase measure threatens regional rail system

By Michael D. Antonovich

Our county's new Gold Line rail system is successfully playing a
vital role in the realization of our county's regional transit plan.
However, a ballot measure by Gov. Gray Davis to raise the sales tax
by a half-cent for the budget-busting subway threatens this plan.


The Gold Line can be expanded by utilizing existing freeway medians
and abandoned railroad rights-of-way for a comprehensive at-grade
and aboveground rail system. This would link Los Angeles County
commuters throughout the region to the Ventura County and San
Bernardino County lines.


Combined with a multi-modal transportation system of buses, commuter
rail and highway/street improvements, the Gold Line will improve
productivity, reduce air pollution, and increase mobility for our
citizens.


Unlike the $5-billion, 17-mile, gold-plated subway, which took
decades to build, the first phase of the nearly 14-mile Gold Line
was built in a few years for approximately $725 million.


At a cost of $1.2 billion, Phase II will connect the Gold Line to
San Bernardino County and run an additional 24 miles from Pasadena
to Arcadia, Monrovia, Duarte, irwindale, Azusa, Glendora, San Dimas,
La Verne, Pomona and Claremont, and could be completed in five
years, if funding was available.


As planning continues on Phase II, we also need to aggressively work
to extend the Gold Line west, with Phases III and IV, through the
San Fernando Valley by connecting the Marengo station in Pasadena
along the 210 and 134 freeways through Glendale to the Media Center
in Burbank with a spur connecting to the Red Line station in North
Hollywood. A Phase IV could be extended along the 101 freeway
corridor to Ventura County. The construction for this project could
be done with less disruption to neighboring residents and taxpayer
pocketbooks.


The vision for a regional rail system serving the entire county --
not just the city of Los Angeles -- is beginning to come into focus,
with the Santa Clarita Valley and Antelope Valley in our sights.


However, the proposed half-cent tax increase ballot measure is a
deceptively attractive package wrapped with smaller transit
projects, to con county taxpayers into paying for a nearly $1-
billion, 3-mile subway extension in the Fairfax district. Vital
resources would be siphoned away from cost-effective projects that
give county commuters and taxpayers more bang for the buck.


Proposed by tunnel-vision vested interests, this measure violates
the law approved by Los Angeles County taxpayers, who overwhelmingly
voted to prohibit further subway construction. This Sacramento
ballot proposal needs to be defeated if Los Angeles County is to
implement cost-effective transit strategies. Our efforts need to be
focused on decreasing congestion, improving air quality, increasing
mobility and enhancing the quality of life for our citizens with
cost-effective transit.



Michael D. Antonovich represents the 5th District, which includes
Glendale, La Cañada Flintridge, La Crescenta and Montrose, on the
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. He can be reached at (213)
974-555 or at .



=PTP==========================================

[BATN]

* SJ mayor Gonzales: keep SJ BART extension moving


San Jose El Observador
Friday, October 10, 2003

Keeping BART to San Jose moving

Statement by Mayor Gonzales


SAN JOSE -­ Given the state of the current economy and the prolonged
recession in Silicon Valley, it is understandable that questions are
raised about the outlook for major transit projects like the
extension of BART to San Jose.


However, more than 70 percent of Santa Clara County voters gave us a
very clear mandate with the passage of Measure A in 2000: Bring BART
here. Our focus, therefore, remains the same: we must continue to
work hard to get the extension under construction and completed as
soon as possible so that we can provide better transit for commuters,
residents and businesses in San Jose and Silicon Valley.


BART is a large project in the 30-year Measure A program. Which
actually doesn't even start until 2006, when revenues from the sales
tax extension stat to flow. We all want things to go smoothly, but we
also know the economy will go up and down over that long period.
Every new snapshot of the local economy will give you a different
scenario and financial projections.


That's why we cannot reduce our efforts or loose sight of the need to
keep this project moving. We need to take the long view and stay
focus on working with the state and the federal government to secure
additional funding. We need to keep doing all we can to strengthen
our local economy, which also will increase our local resources for
transit.


We're making every effort to begin construction as soon as possible.
We're moving ahead with the environmental and engineering work to
allow this to happen. Although we know there will always be ups and
downs in the future we intend to keep pushing to get BART project
under construction.


And we are making progress to obtain the state and federal funding we
need to complete the extension. Securing that funding is a multi-year
effort, of course, and it will require sustained effort by VTA, our
congressional delegation, and our community and business leadership
to reach our goal. I'm encouraged by what we have already
accomplished, and I'm confident we'll reach our destination sooner
rather than later.


Today's VTA projections respond only to one hypothetical scenario
based on the state of the current Silicon Valley economy and very
conservative revenue forecasts and borrowing assumptions. However,
even a small positive change in our economy will have a significant
impact on sales tax revenues and financial-projections, which are why
we must stay focused on keeping the BART project moving.


The biggest variable in the next couple of years is our local
economy, which has slumped deeper and longer than anyone ever could
have expected. Economic recovery will provide the most help in
funding our projects, not only for VTA but also for transit agencies
all over the state. That's another reason I have been pushing so hard
in San Jose to make it easier for businesses and employers to grow
and succeed in our city.


We have already come a long way; the road in the years ahead will
continue to be unpredictable. We have to keep our eyes on our
destination as we have many more rivers to cross and mountains to
climb before this project and others in Measure A are completed. With
the continued support of the community and our elected leadership, i
know we will get there








PTP Digest 2003/10/17-A = CONTENTS

* Houston: Metro rebuffs attacks, deception of rail foes
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 16, 2003

* Seattle: Monorail revenue still falling short
   Seattle Times Thursday, October 16, 2003

* Seattle: Drop in freeway, HOV traffic due to economic slump
   Seattle Times Thursday, October 16, 2003

* Newark: 'Plane to train' is a winner
   Newark Star-Ledger Thursday, October 16, 2003



=PTP============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 16, 2003


Battle over Metro rail full of sound and fury

Opposition, allegations, debate court attention

By LUCAS WALL


The back and forth over Metro's transit plan continued at high speed
Tuesday with three news conferences, a televised debate and allegations
of lawbreaking and lying.

A group of 40 black ministers announced their opposition to the
Metropolitan Transit Authority expansion plan, saying Metro officials did
not meet with them to discuss concerns that bus service will be slashed.
That drew a perplexed response from Metro's president, who said she
assured dozens of the ministers in a July meeting that the plan includes a
50 percent expansion in bus runs with 44 new routes.

U.S. Rep. Chris Bell, D-Houston, accused Rep. John Culberson, R-
Houston, and other rail opponents of lying to voters about Metro's plan,
calling their actions "offensive and insulting."

The verbal combat also included a campaign watchdog group's
announcement that it will file a state ethics complaint against the largest
coalition opposing the transit plan. And a major business group
announced its support for the plan, which includes expansion of Metro's
light rail system, the first line of which is set to open Jan. 1.

"Metro wants to spend $8 billion on rail," said the Rev. J.J. Roberson,
president of the Baptist Ministers Association, who hosted a news
conference at his Mt. Hebron Baptist Church on Calhoun. "They will run
out of money and then cut bus service, which will leave many in our
community without transportation. We do not trust Metro."

The actual construction cost of the 40 light rail miles Metro proposes to
build by 2019 is $2.8 billion, the agency projects.

Roberson complained that the proposed light rail spur to the heavily black
Sunnyside neighborhood won't be built until 2018 and that nobody at
Metro would meet with his group as the transit plan was being drafted.

Metro officials denied the snub, showing the Houston Chronicle a program
from a July 7 meeting where Metro Chairman Arthur Schechter and
Shirley DeLibero, president and CEO, met with Roberson and others to
seek their opinions on the "Metro Solutions" plan. DeLibero said there
also have been several community meetings in Sunnyside.

The six bus routes serving Sunnyside will continue, she said, and Metro
will add two routes through that neighborhood.

"To say the bus riders are going to lose at the expense of rail is not true,"
DeLibero said.

Bob Stein, a Rice University political scientist, said it's smart strategy for
rail opponents to diversify their coalition. But, he said, he still expects an
overwhelming majority of blacks to vote for transit expansion.

in other activity Tuesday, Bell held a morning news conference at Metro's
railyard on West Bellfort to counter Republican attacks on the proposal.

"Rail will relieve traffic congestion, raise the standard of living for all
Houstonians and make urban living a true possibility," he said.

Metro's plan to expand light rail has turned into a bitter partisan fight, with
most Republican officials against it and most Democratic officials favoring
it.

At lunchtime, a downtown business organization, Central Houston,
endorsed Metro's plan during its annual meeting at the Toyota Center.

Central Houston Chairman Richard Everett said Metro Solutions is an
essential element in extending the downtown renaissance into other
neighborhoods.

Tuesday afternoon, Common Cause Texas announced that it is filing a
complaint with the Texas Ethics Commission, contending that the
nonprofit Texans for True Mobility has violated campaign laws by not
disclosing who has given it money for political ads assailing Metro's plan.

The intense day on the campaign trail ended with a discussion among
several key players Tuesday night on KUHT/Channel 8.

Chronicle reporters Kristen Mack and Mike Snyder contributed to this
story.



=PTP================================================

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001767272_dige16m.ht
ml

Seattle Times
Thursday, October 16, 2003

Car-tab taxes for monorail still run below estimates

SEATTLE — Car-tab taxes to pay for Seattle's monorail netted $2.15
million in September, marking the fourth straight month that collections
have run about one-third below original estimates.

if the trend continues, monorail officials have speculated they might need
to cut $224 million to $299 million from their $1.75 billion plan for a "Green
Line" connecting Ballard, downtown and West Seattle. The shortfall was
the result of flawed agency projections, evasion by some vehicle owners
and possible glitches in implementing the new tax.



=PTP=========================================

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001767392_hovside16
m.html

Seattle Times
Thursday, October 16, 2003

Possible explanations for less HOV traffic


As the recession has deepened, officials say traffic on many Seattle-area
freeways has dropped. New research suggests that trend may be even
more pronounced in the HOV lanes.

Seven of the 14 major HOV corridors experienced declines in volume
between 2000 and 2002, says Mark Hallenbeck of the Washington State
Transportation Center at the University of Washington. In most cases,
volumes appear to have dropped more than in the general-purpose lanes.

He offers two possible explanations:

• Car pools collapse when commuters lose or change jobs. "Car pools
may be more sensitive to the economy," Hallenbeck says. In the late
1990s, he notes, "HOV usage was increasing faster than general-purpose
usage."

• As congestion in the general-purpose lanes has eased — even if only
slightly — some erstwhile car poolers or bus riders have reverted to
driving alone.

— Eric Pryne, The Seattle Times



=PTP===============================================

Newark Star-Ledger
Thursday, October 16, 2003

'Plane to train' service in Newark earns praise

Alternative to costly cabs and traffic jams marks 2nd year


BY RON MARSICO
Star-Ledger Staff

Chris Bolan sat with his bags at the far end of Newark Liberty international
Airport's rail platform, looking relaxed as he soaked up the sun one warm
afternoon last week after a business trip to Grand Rapids, Mich.

Normally, Bolan, who lives in Bridgeport, Conn., would be shelling out
cash for a cab to Grand Central Terminal in Manhattan to catch the Metro-
North Railroad or sitting in traffic on interstate 95 if his wife picked him up.
Now, for the first time, he took an Amtrak train home from the airport.

"It makes the commuting -- be it by train or plane -- so much more
efficient," Bolan said. "it's convenient now."

Newark airport's $417 million AirTrain service -- with connections to both
Amtrak and NJ Transit lines -- marks its second anniversary this month,
still the only "train to the plane" service among the region's three major
airports. AirTrain is expected at John F. Kennedy international Airport
later this year, at a cost of $1.9 billion.

Bolan is one of 3,200 average daily users of AirTrain Newark's railroad
connection, which generally wins plaudits for service even as ridership
lags at only two-thirds of original predictions in the aftermath of the Sept.
11, 2001, terrorist attacks and the economic downturn.

Officials with the Tri-State Transportation Campaign say the price of using
AirTrain Newark is too high, especially for families.

For example, a one-way ticket anytime between Manhattan and the
Newark airport station costs $11.55, even though a round-trip, off-peak NJ
Transit ticket between Newark Penn Station and Manhattan costs $5. A
one-way ticket anytime between New Brunswick and the airport station
costs $10.80, whereas a round-trip, off-peak NJ Transit ticket between
New Brunswick and Newark Penn Station costs just $13.

"If they dropped the cost a little bit, maybe they can get their ridership up,"
said Kate Slevin, a Tri-State spokeswoman. "I think the service is good."

The airport station -- a still gleaming but utilitarian mix of concrete, metal
and glass -- connects Amtrak and NJ Transit riders to the monorail that
stops at parking areas and terminals A, B and C. So far, rail passengers
make up a little more than 10 percent of the 30,000 average daily riders
on the monorail, which opened in 1996.

"I think it has brought this airport a major step forward in providing access
to our customers," said Susan Baer, the airport's general manager, of the
rail connections. "It reduces vehicle traffic to and from the airport. ... It
really complements all the work we have done on the roadways."

Baer defended the relatively high ticket costs as necessary to offset the
investment and operating costs by the Port Authority of New York and
New Jersey.

in 2002, the Port Authority spent $19.7 million to run AirTrain Newark, with
approximately half that covering the contract with Bombardier
Transportation of Canada, the system's operator. The agency pays $3.9
million, which comes from its share of the rail ticket revenues. The $15.8
million difference is paid from fees on airlines and rental car companies.

Tickets for AirTrain Newark are slightly below typical bus fares, said Baer,
noting use of the rails also eliminates parking costs for those who would
otherwise drive and leave their cars in long-term lots.

"And it's considerably less than a cab," said Baer, who said a fledgling
discount program for frequent users may be expanded. "And you have the
advantage of reliability."

There is no fee to ride the monorail between terminals and parking lots.

European travelers in particular have taken to the airport's rail link, Port
Authority officials have found.

Per Lundahl, visiting from Sweden, said he opted to use AirTrain Newark
to get to Manhattan last week when he couldn't find a hotel shuttle.

"Most (foreign) airports have got trains -- Amsterdam, Paris, Stockholm
and London, of course," said Lundahl.

While most comments about service are favorable, there are some minor
gripes about poor directional signs and high-decibel announcements on
the monorail cars.

Then there are aesthetics.

The sleek, space-age looking trains, offer quite a view.

The monorail from the station to the airport curves past the huge
Budweiser brewery, over Routes 1&9 and its spaghetti-like access roads
and ramps, before approaching the airport with the new 325-foot air traffic
control tower dominating the scene.

Tourists kill time before flights on the monorail and some of the area's
homeless spend time aboard as well, according to authorities.

Eventually, Port Authority officials want to see baggage service resumed
at the airport station when airline revenues improve. In the longer term,
the agency hopes to connect PATH service to the station, which was built
to accommodate it.

Even with the present service levels, Richard Halpern, a Massachusetts
resident, was impressed with his first use of the system.

"It was very smooth," said Halpern. "I felt like the Jetsons or something."



Ron Marsico covers Newark Liberty international Airport. He may be
reached at rmarsico@starledger.com or (973) 392-7860







PTP Digest 2003/10/16-A = CONTENTS

* Memphis streetcar project costing $19 million under budget
   Memphis Commercial Appeal  October 15, 2003

* Columbus light rail plan moves forward
   Business First - Columbus  Wednesday [2003/10/15]

* Toronto: Rail link to airport to be LRT or diesel?
   Toronto Star Oct. 16, 2003

* Houston: Metro refutes rail foes' claim that rains will flood light rail
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 15, 2003, 1:48PM

* Houston: 'Bulletin 4' zaps more anti-transit myths with facts
   Houston Transportation Bulletin 4 October 15, 2003

* LA: Surface vs. tunnel debated for Expo LRT line through USC
   Daily Trojan Vol. 150, No. 35 (Wednesday, October 15, 2003)

* Phoenix: Valley Metro refutes LRT foes on air pollution claims
   Arizona Republic Oct. 16, 2003

* Austin: 'Scenario B' envisions LRT & fast buses, moderate sprawl
   News 8 Austin 10/13/2003



=PTP=================================================

[PTP NOTE: According to Light Rail Central (lightrail.com), the Memphis
Medical Center streetcar project is 2.5 miles long.]

http://www.gomemphis.com/mca/local_news/article/0,1426,MCA_437_234
7514,00.html

Memphis Commercial Appeal
October 15, 2003

Madison trolley line costing $19 million less than expected

By Lance Murphey

[PHOTO]
Willis Chisom (left) and Michael Watkins work on the tracks near Madison
and Lauderdale.

By Tom Bailey Jr.
baileytom@gomemphis.com

Construction of the Madison Rail Line is $19 million under budget, the
head of Memphis Area Transit Authority said Tuesday.

"Good contracts," William Hudson said in explaining the projected surplus.

The agency budgeted $74 million.

Now the cost is expected to be about $55 million, which includes the
purchase of five trolleys and other equipment.

"Good bridge contracts. Good rail contracts. Equipment contracts," said
Hudson, president and general manager of MATA. Memphis Light Gas
and Water Division came in under budget as well, he said.

The two-mile line linking downtown to the Medical Center and Midtown is
90 percent complete. It extends from Main to just beyond Cleveland.

All rail is in place. The authority will mark the final weld with a ceremony at
10 a.m. today on Madison at Dudley.

Still to be completed are the train stations and overhead power lines.

Once the project is finished, the authority will begin testing the system.
The rail line is scheduled to open in March.

"We had a good experience" with the contractors, Hudson said. ". . . A lot
of good contract negotiations and good people to do business with."

Hill Brothers Construction of Falkner, Miss., is building the line.

The federal government is paying for 80 percent of the project. Any
unused money would have to be returned to the Federal Transit
Administration, or MATA could request to spend it on other rail projects,
said Alison Burton, MATA's marketing director.

MATA would not be allowed to use any extra money for its bus service,
she said.

MATA plans to build another 9 to 10 miles of rail line from some point
along the Madison Rail Line to Memphis international Airport.

The decision on where to route that $400 million line should be made
early next year, Hudson said.



=PTP===============================================

http://columbus.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/2003/10/13/daily19.html

Business First - Columbus
Wednesday [2003/10/15]

COTA moves forward with light rail study

The Central Ohio Transit Authority has signed memoranda of
understanding with two freight rail companies to help in a light rail study.

COTA will reimburse CSX Transportation Inc. and Norfolk Southern Corp.
$155,200 for their cooperation in the study. The study will determine how
to initiate COTA's North Corridor project, a proposed 13.2-mile light rail
line from the Polaris area to downtown Columbus. COTA may have to
alter freight service patterns and move a west side freight yard to
complete the project.

COTA hopes to have the study done by next summer, along with an
environmental impact statement.

The light rail line is part of COTA's Fast Trax plan. More information on
the plan is available at www.cotafasttrax.com. Early engineering has been
funded through state and federal grants. Voters turned down a proposed
quarter-cent sales tax increase in 1999 that included funding for the line.


=PTP===========================================

Toronto Star
Oct. 16, 2003


Rail-link decision awaited

Ottawa expected to rule in two months

Line would connect Union with airport

KEVIN MCGRAN
TRANSPORTATION REPORTER

Transport Minister David Collenette is expected to decide in the next two
months on which group will win the contract to bring a high-speed
connection between Union Station and Pearson airport.

A private consortium that is one of three groups bidding to build the rail
link between the downtown and airport also wants to build a light-rail
transit network connecting Toronto to the 905 regions.

The rail link, which would speed passengers between Pearson and
downtown in 20 minutes, is expected to carry 77,000 passengers a day.

"The evaluation is in progress and we anticipate an announcement could
be made this fall," said department press secretary Amy Butcher.

The light-rail consortium has been looking to get a foot in the door for at
least two years. Aecon, a construction company, ALSTOM, which builds
trains, and Borealis, which finances such things, together have been
promoting a $2.5 billion project dubbed SmartRide LRT.

it would use mostly hydro right-of-ways and existing rail corridors for a
light-rail system that would augment local and GO transit. So far, no level
of government has bought into the plan.

Aecon and ALSTOM recently teamed up again, dusted off the LRT
proposal and refined it to fit the Union-Pearson rail-link project. This time,
it's called the GTA LRT Consortium. The proponents suggest that light rail
is a better fit for the link in terms of easy connections with GO and the
Toronto Transit Commission.

"The technology you choose has an impact on what you can actually do
with the corridor," said Stefan Parche, vice-president of development for
Aecon infrastructure.

Picking a single-purpose technology for the link — one that can't easily be
expanded beyond the original line — means that "you basically destroy
the corridor and prevent it from being used as part of a larger network,"
Parche said. "So that needs to be looked at from a GTA system-wide
implication."

The federal government invited four consortia to present proposals for the
link.

Two other contenders for the job are Macquarie North America Ltd. and
Union Pearson Group Inc. Both groups advocate diesel technology for the
engines — lighter trains than those used by GO Transit but heavier than
what GTA LRT Consortium is proposing.

A fourth group, Pearl Consortium, which included Bombardier
Transportation, dropped out because the scope of the project changed,
said spokesperson Helene Gagnon.

The sticking point was a new requirement that the winning consortium
take over the "ridership risk," so that if ridership fell below expectations or
the line failed to make a profit, the company would shoulder the loss with
no hope of federal cash.

in industry and political circles, there are doubts that the airport link will
ever get off the ground, especially with political changes in the offing.
Prime-minister-in-waiting Paul Martin is not believed to be a big backer of
it, while Ontario premier-elect Dalton McGuinty may discover more
pressing needs.

"In my view, it's certainly not the top transportation priority of the region,"
said Michael Roschlau, president of the Canadian Urban Transit
Association.

"To me it would be a shame if public money were used to give that project
priority over other projects that are far more important, like the (TTC's)
state of good repair, the ability to increase the capacity of our transit
systems in the GTA."


The rail link will be built with private money, although funding for upgrades
in track capacity and bridge improvements needed for the new service will
come out of the $435 million in federal funding for urban transportation in
the GTA announced in March.



=PTP==================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 15, 2003, 1:48PM


Group rails at Metro's planning

Opponents say rains will leave cars useless

By HEATHER SAUCIER


Opponents of the Metropolitan Transit Authority's light rail, which is
gearing up for its Jan. 1, 2004 start date, have found another reason to
criticize the system other than claims it will not ease congestion.

Pointing to Houston's history of flooding, opponents claim the light rail is
the wrong choice for transportation because rail cars cannot operate in
more than 3 inches of water. They are particularly concerned about the
Texas Medical Center, which filled with water during Tropical Storm
Allison.

"it's an important point that someone ought to bring out," said David
Hutzelman, director of the Business Committee Against Rail, commonly
known as BusCAR. "Flooding has just been glossed over in the obsession
to become a world-class city. If most people knew the light rail could run in
no more than 3 inches of water, they would [ask], 'What is someone doing
building a system like that in Houston, Texas?'"

Hutzelman has debated several Metro officials on television, and speaks
at various civic clubs encouraging voters to defeat the upcoming bond
issue on Nov. 4.

Having battled intense criticism of its 7.5 miles of light rail, which will run
from Reliant Park through downtown, Metro has long been prepared to
respond to flooding concerns. The trains will be the most reliable travel
mode during a flood at the Texas Medical Center, said a Frequently
Asked Questions brochure published last year for the public. Metro rails
alignment is designed to be above the 100-year flood plain, where
practical. However, in the Texas Medical Center, the streets are within the
100-year flood plain, and elevation is not practical.

"Publicizing that the tracks are at or above the 100-year flood plain, is
misleading," said Barry Klein, president of the Houston Property Rights
Association, who actively opposes the light-rail system. "That
classification is an unreliable construct that is exceeded every several
years with frequent heavy rains," he said.

Tom Bazan, a member of the Houston Property Rights Association who
has filed a civil rights complaint against the transit authority, said Metro
ignored Houston's vulnerability for flooding when it built its system at
grade.

"Metro refused to elevate its tracks because that is more expensive,
requiring the public to approve bonds," he said.

"Consequently, when streets gather more than 3 inches of water, the rail
system will shut down," Bazan said. "That's certainly going to be
embarrassing for Metro because they're going to have to use all our buses
to rescue the passengers," he said. "Why spend $2.5 million for a rail car
for it not to be able to travel through the typical flooding streets in
Houston?"

"Rail cars might not be able to travel through more than a few inches of
water, but the tracks were built on the crests of streets, which are higher
than areas near curbs," said Chip Lambert, spokesman for Metro. "If
streets are inundated with flood water, Metro will employ a bus bridge and
send buses to rescue stranded passengers and drive them to another rail
car or their destinations. Buses can operate in 6 to 8 inches of water,
Lambert said."

"In addition, the transit authority and City of Houston have taken several
precautions to minimize the risk of flooding along the light rail line," he
said.

"They have sealed and moved above ground the electric control panel
that powers the water pump near the Holcomb Boulevard overpass at
Fannin Street. They have expanded the drain line from Holcombe to
Brays Bayou from 42 to 46 inches. And they have extended the Fannin
Street bridge that crosses the channel by 60 feet to accommodate the
widening of the bayou, a project of the Harris County Flood Control District
that aims to reduce the risk of flooding in the area," Lambert said.

"Once Brays Bayou is widened, the light-rail area near the Medical Center
will be removed from the 100-year flood plain," Lambert said.

"While the Flood Control District agrees that channel widening will reduce
the areas risk of flooding, actual construction on the bayou will not begin
until 2006, said Alisa Max," spokeswoman for the district. Channel
widening near the Medical Center will not begin until 2010. "it's going to
be a while," she said. "The majority of relief will be coming when channel
modifications occur in 2010."

in the meantime, the city is rebuilding storm sewers on Fannin, Kirby
Drive, Hermann Drive and MacGregor Drive, said Gary Norman, public
information officer for the city's Public Works and Engineering
Department. "The projects will increase the carrying capacity of
underground sewers and decrease the amount of storm water flowing to
the Medical Center," he said.

Regardless of the efforts taking place, light-rail opponents insist Metro is
turning its back on flooding and cheating taxpayers and passengers.

"We need to spend more money on roads," Hutzelman said, adding that
less than 2 percent of daily trips in Harris County are made on Metro.

"The rail will not ease traffic, as it carries so few commuters. In fact, by
taking up lanes on the streets, it will cause more congestion along its
path," he said.

Bazan said he could support the rail if it were funded by private dollars
and raised above the streets.

"If they would have made it elevated, it would not tie up traffic and there
would be no flooding issues," he said. They could have built skywalks that
lead to elevated stations and have a space city appearance."

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/thisweek/zone09/news/215877
6



=PTP==========================================

Houston Transportation Bulletin 4
October 15, 2003
_____________________________

The Metro Solutions plan to greatly improve transit in the Houston region
will come to a vote on November 4. To help increase understanding of the
proposal and of transit's place in the greater transportation picture, the
Gulf Coast institute will publish a series of educational bulletins.

...

Transit myths

"Transit is heavily subsidized, cars are not." Fact: All transportation is
subsidized. US transit expenditures total about $30 billion annually, of
which two-thirds are subsidies, compared with $120 billion spent on roads
of which $50 billion are subsidies (from general taxes), plus $30 billion in
general taxes spent on traffic services, $270 billion in parking subsidies,
and $600 billion spent on private motor vehicles(1).


Transit Facts

Across the nation, public transit rail revenue vehicle miles operated
increased by nearly 20 percent between 1991 and 2000. Non-rail revenue
vehicle miles (mostly bus) grew about 18 percent during the same
period(2).


Metro Solutions

METRO held 178 public and stakeholder meetings during its development
of the METRO Solutions plan between December 2001 and July 2003.
The alternative "plan" backed by METRO Solutions opponents, the "100
Percent Solution Plan," is still in draft form and has not yet had specific
public involvement for the additional 5,000 lane-miles on top of the
already planned 5,600 lane-miles(3).

Economic Benefits

The reduced pollution emissions (from nitrogen oxides and volatile
organic compounds) that result from public transportation use save
between $130 million and $200 million a year in regulatory costs(4).


Health

During the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games, expanded public transportation
services reduced morning peak auto use by 22.5 percent and reduced
mobile source emissions. There was a 44.1 percent reduction in asthma-
related medical visits among HMO enrollees(5).


Metro Facts

Metro's Main Street light rail line that will open January 1, 2004 will feature
16 light rail stations, each uniquely designed by local artists for the
neighborhood it represents(6).


Existing Rail Systems

in 2000, Dallas's voters approved $2.9 billion in long-term bonds to
accelerate future light rail line construction. Dallas currently has over 44
miles of light rail with plans to expand to 93 miles(7).

Equity

Transportation policies that encourage personal automobile travel have an
inequitable effect on the finances of minority and low-income individuals
with those in the lowest fifth of income earners spending 36 percent of
their household budget on transportation compared with those in the
highest fifth income spending 14 percent(5).


Sources

1. Evaluating Criticism of Smart Growth (draft), Todd Litman, Victoria
Transport Policy institute,  September 16, 2003.
http://www.vtpi.org/sgcritics.pdf
2. Fitch Ratings, "Running for the Train: the Path Ahead for US Transit,"
June 2003.
3. Metropolitan Transportation Authority of Harris County.
4. The Benefits of Public Transportation, American Public Transportation
Association, September 2002.
5. Center for Transportation Excellence website, http://www.cfte.org/
6. Metropolitan Transportation Authority of Harris County
http://www.mocah.org/newsite/metro/metro.htm
7. Dallas Area Rapid Transit, DART inmotion newsletter, summer 2003.
8. Metro Solutions Plan, Metropolitan Transportation Authority of Harris
County.

Houston Transportation Bulletin is a publication of the Gulf Coast institute.
To support the institute, go to http://www.gulfcoastideas.org. To join the
institute's 1000 Friends of Houston, go to
http://www.1000friendsofhouston.org.
Email: issues@gulfcoastideas.org
_____________________________
David Crossley
Gulf Coast institute
3015 Richmond Suite 250
Houston TX 77098

Ph 713-523-5757
Fx 713-523-3057
http://www.livablehouston.org




=PTP==============================================

http://www.dailytrojan.com/article.do?issue=/V150/N35&id=01-
expo.35c.html&p=1

Daily Trojan
Vol. 150, No. 35 (Wednesday, October 15, 2003)
Pages 1 - 13.

Exploring the Expo Line

Local leaders weigh in on a proposal to build a light-rail line next to
campus.

[PHOTO]
Katherine Beck | Daily Trojan
Light rail. A Metro Blue Line train arrives at the Pico Boulevard station in
downtown Los Angeles. The proposed Expo Line would also serve this
station, as well as USC's University Park Campus.

By JASON CARTER
Staff Writer

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is planning to build a light-rail
line connecting USC's University Park Campus with downtown Los
Angeles and Culver City, but community leaders disagree about its design
and cost-effectiveness.

The Expo Line, an electric-powered train designed to travel down the
middle of Exposition Boulevard on its way from Downtown's Seventh
Street Metro Station to Culver City, could be completed by 2012, said
Steve Brye, MTA project manager.

The MTA's ultimate goal is to extend the line to Santa Monica, Brye
added.

in order to keep an open space between campus and the communities
south of Exposition Boulevard, "the university's position all along has been
that (the line) should be underground between USC and Exposition Park,"
said Curt Williams, vice president of USC's Capital Construction
Development.

The MTA board directed its staff not to study the possibility of tunneling
the line because construction costs for an underground rail line are much
higher than laying street-level track, Brye said.

The university is concerned that the Expo Line will act as a barrier
between campus and the community south of Exposition Boulevard,
Williams said.

Jon Gibby, general manager of Exposition Park, disagreed.

The Expo Line would not be a greater obstruction than the Exposition
Boulevard median and the street's 60 mile-per-hour traffic, Gibby said.

The Expo Line would benefit Exposition Park by attracting visitors who
could not come otherwise, Gibby added.

Funding is the biggest obstacle facing the Expo Line project, Brye said.

The MTA has enough funding for preliminary engineering for the Expo
Line project, but will need additional funding to begin construction, Brye
said. Preliminary engineering will be finished some time next year.

Funding for the construction has become possible because outgoing Gov.
Gray Davis signed SB 314, also known as the Murray Bill.

The Murray Bill authorizes the MTA to put an additional half-cent sales tax
on Los Angeles County's November ballot to raise the $925 million the
Expo Line is estimated to cost, said Darrell Clarke, centerline outreach
manager for the Orange County Transportation Authority.

"If you build the whole thing economically, you could do it with the Murray
Bill," Clarke said.

The Bus Riders Union, a nonprofit community organization, said funds
should be spent on expanding bus service throughout the city instead of
constructing the new rail line.

The MTA is ignoring the issue of overcrowded, inner-city buses by
spending money on the Expo Line, said Manuel Criollo, lead organizer for
the BRU.

it is more cost-effective to invest in buses than in light-rail transit because
the bus system can service a greater volume of passengers at a lower
maintenance cost, Criollo added. Both the MTA and the BRU want to
attract more riders to public transportation, he said.

"Having a modern line like this close to the campus would be a benefit to
students, faculty and staff," Williams said.

The line will make the Westside and Downtown areas more accessible to
students, he added.

The Expo Line would provide an alternative to taking the USC Trams or
the DASH for students and faculty commuting to Seventh Street Metro
Station, said Stephan Lau, a senior majoring in accounting.

Riding the Expo Line may save students time and money on gas, said
Marco Shih, a freshman majoring in pre-business.

Rail tracks were laid from Exposition Boulevard to Santa Monica in 1875.

The line was then known as the Santa Monica Air Line, and was served
by Pacific Electric's Red Car trolleys until the line was abandoned in 1953.

After that, the tracks changed hands several times until the MTA bought
them in 1990.

Owning the land for the rail line makes the project more feasible because
no houses or businesses need to be torn down to make room for the
tracks, Brye said.



=PTP=================================================

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/1016antitransit.htm
l

Arizona Republic
Oct. 16, 2003

Light-rail foes cite air woes

Valley planners say claims untrue

Bob Golfen

Opponents of the Valley's planned light-rail system claimed Wednesday
that the transit line would worsen air pollution and traffic congestion and
pointed at rail planners' own documents as evidence.

in a press conference on the lawn of the Arizona Senate building,
community activist Becky Fenger and economist John Semmens told of
their "silver bullet" discoveries gained through researching Valley Metro
Rail documents.

Fenger, speaking from behind a small table decorated with rubber rats
and roaches, said Valley Metro officials in their Final Environmental
impact Statement had reported to the Federal Transit Administration that
air quality would worsen after the light-rail system was built.

"To spend billions of dollars to worsen air pollution and traffic congestion,
that's insane," Fenger said.

Phoenix Public Transit Director Ed Zuercher said opponents were
misrepresenting the information in the environmental statement.

"I don't know where she gets her information, but it's not true," Zuercher
said, characterizing Fenger as "a professional anti-transit activist."

Voters go to the polls May 18 to decide on a 20-year half-cent sales tax
that would fund light rail and other transit, freeway and street
improvements Valley-wide.

Fenger and Semmens pointed out portions of the Valley Metro's
environmental statistics that showed projected air pollution increasing at
eight out of 12 locations along the light-rail route.

Semmens noted a section in the impact statement that showed traffic
congestion increasing along the rail line.

Zuercher, speaking on the lawn after the press conference, said light rail
is projected to prevent 10 tons of various tailpipe pollutants daily. The
estimate is supported by a model devised by the Maricopa Association of
Governments, a Valley planning organization, he said.

The opponents are "twisting the statistics" to suit their message, said
Valley Metro spokeswoman Daina Mann, noting that the federal
Environmental Protection Agency has praised Valley Metro's statistics and
conclusions in support of light rail's effect on air quality and traffic
congestion.

She said the air-pollution gains cited by the opponents are miniscule and
reflect gains caused by automobile traffic at the park-and-ride lots along
the light-rail route.

"This is common sense," Mann said. "At these particular sites, more
people are there parking their cars."

As for traffic congestion, the most recent projections show annual travel-
time savings of 6.3 million hours, the amount of time people will save in
travel time because of light rail, Mann said.



=PTP=============================================

http://www.news8austin.com/content/special_coverage/news_8_town_hall
/?SecID=381&ArID=86353

News 8 Austin
10/13/2003

Envision Central Texas: Scenario B

By: Antonio Castelan and Web staff

Central Texas' population is exploding. In the next 20 to 40 years, the
population is expected to swell from 1.4 million to 2.5 million.

Envision Central Texas (ECT) has spent the past two years working with
communities across the five counties, gathering citizen input on how best
the expected growth should be distributed and managed.

They have come up with four scenarios that consider land use,
transportation, and the environment.

Scenario B's main area of change is transportation. Like the other three
plans, it proposes a commuter rail train from Georgetown to San Marcos.

The average morning rush hour trip time would be 19 minutes, which is
along the same lines as the others. The highest (Scenario A) is 22
minutes and the lowest (Scenario D) is 18 minutes.

Ninety percent of Central Texas drivers would still use their cars to get to
work.

Scenario B also calls for an extensive express bus system and a light rail
from Williamson County to South Austin.

Planners at Capital Metro are already thinking down the road.



[GRAPHIC]
  Scenario B
Th plan would feature an express bus system and a light rail from
Williamson County to South Austin.



"We are looking at multiple methods of transportation. We are looking
down the road at the possibilities of using existing bus service, using light
rail, using commuter rail, and other forms so that there will be a lot of
solutions to help ease Central Texas congestion," Rick L'Amie of Capital
Metro said.

Scenario B also projects more people would work in Downtown Austin and
use the commuter rail.

it concentrates growth along I-35 and Texas Tollway 130, now under
construction.

There would be a 26 percent increase in urbanized land, and $5.5 billion
allocated to build a new infrastructure.

With 19,000 acres (30.2 square miles) to be developed over the Edwards
Aquifer, environmentalists said that number is unaccpetable.

"If Central Texas is going to preserve the Edwards Aquifer we are going to
need to protect the land on top of the aquifer," Colin Clark of the Save Our
Springs (S.O.S.) Alliance said.

Scenario B's development of the Edwards Aquifer is the second highest of
the four. If growth continues as it does now, in Scenario A, then 56.7
square miles would be developed.

Scenarios C and D, however, each call for less than one square mile to be
developed.

The housing trend would remain like it is now. Sixty-three percent of
people would live in single family houses and the remaining 37 percent
would live in condominiums and apartments, the same as in Scenario A.

Builders see the trends continuing.

"The first choice for almost every consumer is to be able to have a
traditional single family house with a traditional yard, and hopefully a
reasonable commute to work," said Harry Savio, executive vice president
of the Austin Homebuilders Association.






PTP Digest 2003/10/15-A = CONTENTS

* Houston: Rail foes attacked for deception, non-disclosure
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 14, 2003

* Houston: More facts vs. muths, FAQs on Metro Solutions plan
   Houston Transportation Bulletin 3 October 13, 2003

* Detroit: Suburb calls for LRT
   Detroit Free Press October 14, 2003

* Amtrak op-ed: Amtrak gains justify federal help
   Austin American-Statesman Tuesday, October 14, 2003

* Amtrak: Major ridership gains in No. California
   Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority Monday, October 13, 2003

* Tampa: Bombardier shows off JetTrain locomotive
   Newstream October 2003

* Kuala Lumpur monorail continues ridership increase
   Star Publications (Malaysia) Tuesday October 14, 2003

* Milwaukee: Regional rail link planned, guided bus studied
   Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Oct. 15, 2003

* Orange County Ca: LRT property acquisition readied
   Los Angeles Times October 15, 2003

* Salt Lake suburbs: 'BRT' plan to go to voters
   Salt Lake Tribune TUESDAY October 14, 2003

* Phoenix: LRT planners mull saving historic trees
   Arizona Republic Oct. 14, 2003

* NJ: Regional rail's 'morbid lure' for suicides, aggressive drivers
   New York Times October 15, 2003



=PTP=============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 14, 2003

Battle over Metro rail full of sound and fury

Opposition, allegations, debate court attention

By LUCAS WALL


The back and forth over Metro's transit plan continued at high speed
Tuesday with three news conferences, a televised debate and allegations
of lawbreaking and lying.

A group of 40 black ministers announced their opposition to the
Metropolitan Transit Authority expansion plan, saying Metro officials did
not meet with them to discuss concerns that bus service will be slashed.
That drew a perplexed response from Metro's president, who said she
assured dozens of the ministers in a July meeting that the plan includes a
50 percent expansion in bus runs with 44 new routes.

U.S. Rep. Chris Bell, D-Houston, accused Rep. John Culberson, R-
Houston, and other rail opponents of lying to voters about Metro's plan,
calling their actions "offensive and insulting."

The verbal combat also included a campaign watchdog group's
announcement that it will file a state ethics complaint against the largest
coalition opposing the transit plan. And a major business group
announced its support for the plan, which includes expansion of Metro's
light rail system, the first line of which is set to open Jan. 1.

"Metro wants to spend $8 billion on rail," said the Rev. J.J. Roberson,
president of the Baptist Ministers Association, who hosted a news
conference at his Mt. Hebron Baptist Church on Calhoun. "They will run
out of money and then cut bus service, which will leave many in our
community without transportation. We do not trust Metro."

The actual construction cost of the 40 light rail miles Metro proposes to
build by 2019 is $2.8 billion, the agency projects.

Roberson complained that the proposed light rail spur to the heavily black
Sunnyside neighborhood won't be built until 2018 and that nobody at
Metro would meet with his group as the transit plan was being drafted.

Metro officials denied the snub, showing the Houston Chronicle a program
from a July 7 meeting where Metro Chairman Arthur Schechter and
Shirley DeLibero, president and CEO, met with Roberson and others to
seek their opinions on the "Metro Solutions" plan. DeLibero said there
also have been several community meetings in Sunnyside.

The six bus routes serving Sunnyside will continue, she said, and Metro
will add two routes through that neighborhood.

"To say the bus riders are going to lose at the expense of rail is not true,"
DeLibero said.

Bob Stein, a Rice University political scientist, said it's smart strategy for
rail opponents to diversify their coalition. But, he said, he still expects an
overwhelming majority of blacks to vote for transit expansion.

in other activity Tuesday, Bell held a morning news conference at Metro's
railyard on West Bellfort to counter Republican attacks on the proposal.

"Rail will relieve traffic congestion, raise the standard of living for all
Houstonians and make urban living a true possibility," he said.

Metro's plan to expand light rail has turned into a bitter partisan fight, with
most Republican officials against it and most Democratic officials favoring
it.

At lunchtime, a downtown business organization, Central Houston,
endorsed Metro's plan during its annual meeting at the Toyota Center.

Central Houston Chairman Richard Everett said Metro Solutions is an
essential element in extending the downtown renaissance into other
neighborhoods.

Tuesday afternoon, Common Cause Texas announced that it is filing a
complaint with the Texas Ethics Commission, contending that the
nonprofit Texans for True Mobility has violated campaign laws by not
disclosing who has given it money for political ads assailing Metro's plan.

The intense day on the campaign trail ended with a discussion among
several key players Tuesday night on KUHT/Channel 8.

Chronicle reporters Kristen Mack and Mike Snyder contributed to this
story.



http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2157760



=PTP===============================================

Houston Transportation Bulletin 3
October 13, 2003


The Metro Solutions plan to greatly improve transit in the Houston region
will come to a vote on November 4. To help increase understanding of the
proposal and of transit¹s place in the greater transportation picture, the
Gulf Coast institute will publish a series of educational bulletins.
...

Mobility Myths

"Building more roads is the solution to Houston¹s congestion." Fact: "it
would be almost impossible to attempt to maintain constant congestion
level with road construction only," states the recent Texas Transportation
institute Urban Mobility Study. In fact, even though Houston added
freeway and principal arterial street lane miles at a much higher rate (84
percent) than population (45 percent) during the past two decades,
Houston¹s congestion has increased 175 percent over that same time
period (measured by Annual Delay, or extra time spent traveling)(1).


Houston Mobility Facts

Houstonians travel more miles per day than there are miles between the
earth and the sun. The distance between the earth and the sun is about
93 million miles. Houstonians drive about 156 million miles per day (1).


Economic Benefits

Dallas¹s light rail has resulted in $1.3 billion of private investment
around its rail corridors (2).


Light Rail Playing Field

The FY2004 federal appropriations act passed by the US House of
Representatives states, ³None of the funds in this Act shall be made
available for the design, construction, or maintenance of any segment of a
light rail system in Houston that has not been specifically approved by a
majority of the participating voters in the Houston Metropolitan Transit
Authority service area in a referendum.²  Houston is the only city in the
nation with such a funding restriction in the Act. Consequently, Houston is
absent from the funding list that divides more than $1.2 billion federal
dollars among 25 cities. Houston¹s smaller neighbor Dallas is slotted to
receive $30 million next year (3). Since it began building light rail in
1988, Dallas is estimated to have received $493 million federal funds for
light rail (4).


100 Percent Solution Plan

The METRO Solutions opposition cites the ³100 Percent Solutions Plan²
being developed by the Houston-Galveston Area Council as an alternative
to METRO Solutions. However, the 100 Percent Solutions Plan not only
includes METRO Solutions, but includes an expanded version of METRO
Solutions with more rail and bus than in METRO¹s plan. The METRO
Solutions transit plan is a part of the 100 Percent Solution Plan that
already has identified funding sources (5).


Metro Facts

Transit serves 42 percent of all morning peak period, home based work
trips to downtown, 31 percent to the Medical Center, 7 percent to the
Galleria, and 6 percent to Greenway plaza. All areas would be served with
the METRO Solutions light rail, helping transit market shares in each
location to significantly increase by 2025 (6). Note: see attached pdf for
chart.


Correction: Transportation Bulletin 1 stated that METRO would complete
22 miles of rail and its entire bus expansion in the first ten years. It will
actually complete 22 miles of rail and only 33 percent of its bus expansion
in the first ten years.


Sources
1. 2003 Urban Mobility Report, Texas Transportation institute. September
2003. http://mobility.tamu.edu.
2. DART website,
http://www.dart.org/newsroommain.asp?zeon=economicimpact
3. US House Resolution 2989, ³Transportation, Treasury, and
independent
Agencies Appropriations Act,² 2004.
4. Dallas federal funding dollars from a discussion with Morgan Lyons,
DART,
7 October 2003.
5. The 100 Percent Solution Plan (presentation to Transportation Policy
Council) Houston-Galveston Area Council, September 2003.
6. Metropolitan Transportation Authority of Harris County. Based on
Houston-Galveston Area Council data and travel forecasts for METRO
Solutions
with additional 72 Miles of rail.  Based on transit linked trips.


Houston Transportation Bulletin is a publication of the Gulf Coast
institute. To support the institute, go to http://www.gulfcoastideas.org. To
join the institute¹s 1000 Friends of Houston, go to
http://www.1000friendsofhouston.org.
Email: issues@gulfcoastideas.org
_____________________________
Gulf Coast institute
3015 Richmond Suite 250
Houston TX 77098


Ph 713-523-5757
Fx 713-523-3057
http://www.livablehouston.org



=PTP==========================================

http://www.freep.com/cgi-bin/forms/printerfriendly.pl

Detroit Free Press
October 14, 2003

LIGHT RAIL: Make it part of the debate with other transit options

Editorial

The Ferndale City Council jumped the gun in calling for a light-rail transit
system along Woodward. Still, the action should spark a needed debate
on rail service in the region.

Ferndale is urging the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments and
the new Detroit Area Regional Transportation Authority to start designing
a light-rail line from downtown Detroit to 9 Mile or even all the way north to
Pontiac. City Manager Thomas Barwin says Washington would pay up to
80 percent of the project's cost. Now, he said, the region is losing about
$60 million a year to urban areas that are building rail systems.

Heavily traveled corridors like Woodward need better service. But whether
to use rail, rapid-transit buses or something else is up for debate. The
federal government first requires an evaluation of those alternatives
before providing money. Michigan's congressional delegation should
make sure southeast Michigan gets the money to at least do that.

Rail service could spur business development and provide drivers with an
attractive alternative to congested commutes. But rail advocates must
recognize that the region lacks a consensus on mass transit. The costs
are high -- about $50 million a mile -- and the feds usually pay only 60
percent or less. The rest must come locally, and that could make the
suburbs more skittish about a regional system.

More important, high-cost rail lines must not take service from elsewhere
in the system. Metro job centers are spread throughout the region. Getting
low-income workers without cars to those jobs must remain the first
priority of the new regional transportation authority.

it's too soon to decide whether the benefits of rail in metro Detroit
outweigh the costs.



=PTP=================================================

http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/auto/epaper/editions/tuesday/e
ditorial_f3b80a32b1e06052001c.html

Austin American-Statesman
Tuesday, October 14, 2003

Amtrak needs federal help, not hindrance

John Young
WACO TRIBUNE-HERALD


if the U.S. economy were doing as well as the Texas Eagle, there would
be little suspense about George W. Bush getting a second term.

The Texas Eagle, the Amtrak route through Central Texas, increased
ridership almost 20 percent this year.

A 20 percent boost in ridership on the Texas Eagle? What a miserable
failure. Pull the plug on that sucker.

That appears to be the stance of the Bush administration. However, not
every Republican in Washington is on board. U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey
Hutchison is fighting with extreme vigor not only to keep the Texas Eagle
running but to pump up America's investment in Amtrak.

Todd Gillman of The Dallas Morning News and the National Association of
Rail Passengers share some figures that make Bush's designs for Amtrak
indefensible, like the nearly 20 percent bump in ridership on the Texas
Eagle.

What Bush wants to do with Amtrak is comparable to what he proposes to
do with other programs like Head Start and Medicaid: dump it in the laps
of cash-starved states.

in the case of Amtrak, he proposes ending federal subsidies after six
years. On Medicaid and Head Start, he proposes ongoing funding to take
the form of finite block grants virtually certain not to keep up with needs,
thereby forcing states to make up the difference.

Opponents of Amtrak will say that it loses money. Guilty as charged. The
nation gets only 37 cents back for every dollar spent.

Just curious: How many cents do taxpayers get back for every highway
dollar spent? How many cents do taxpayers get back on tax subsidies to
oil companies to fuel behemoth vehicles?

Opponents of subsidizing Amtrak -- particularly our president -- are guilty
of one the greatest double standards of the century.

The rail passengers group points out that while Congress spent $26 billion
on Amtrak, it spent $405 billion on highways and $150 billion on airlines.

Hutchison thinks that instead of pulling back from Amtrak, the nation
should get serious and bolstering Amtrak. She proposes with an additional
$60 billion over six years -- $48 billion in loans -- to make Amtrak more
efficient and to better probe the possibilities of higher-speed rail.

if we are to have viable alternatives to our congested highways, policy
makers and citizens need to start putting roads and rails on comparable
planes.

A few years ago Texas nosed up to the visionary idea of contracting to
bring high-speed rail roughly along the interstate 35 corridor. The idea fell
through basically because of one arbitrary and wholly unreasonable
requirement: no direct state subsidies.

Unreasonable, and ridiculous. As much money as taxpayers pour into
highways, the thought of subsidizing passenger rail traffic shouldn't offend
anyone.

in this land of plenty, where our influence spans the globe and rebuilds
nations, this nation can afford viable alternatives to automobiles.
Unfortunately, our approach to rail is Third World all the way.

Young is opinion page editor of the Waco Tribune-Herald. Contact him at
jyoung@wacotrib.com.




=PTP=============================================

Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority
Monday, October 13, 2003

Summary of September ridership and ticket revenue results, as reported
by Amtrak [northern California]:


Capitol Corridor:
*            90,304 passengers  +7.5% vs FY02 and a record for the month
*            $ 913,710 ticket revenue  +8.4% vs FY02
(EKS Editorial: This September record ridership was achieved even
though on-time performance was still below the 90% standard- September
was only 82.8% - however, since October 6, on-time performance has
improved dramatically, especially on trains #527 and 538. Since October
6, only one day was at 83.3% (the lowest), and all the rest were between
87% and 100% on-time, including several 100% days, a most
encouraging trend.)


Pacific Surfliner:
*            204,880 passengers  +43.6% vs FY02 and a record for the
month (Please note that this number includes the 24,741 Rail 2 Rail
passengers from August that were not counted with the August results.
Excluding the August Rail 2 Rail ridership would still have resulted in
record ridership for September and a 26.3% increase vs FY02)
*            $ 2,689,138 ticket revenue  +18.7% vs FY02


San Joaquins:
*            56,132 passengers  +8.2% vs FY02 and a record for the month
*            $ 1,673,678 ticket revenue  +30.1% vs FY02 (Please note
that a portion of the revenue reported in September is actually for buses
from August that were not reported in time.)




Eugene K. Skoropowski
Managing Director
Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority
1000 Broadway, Suite 604
Oakland, California 94607


e-mail: eskorop@bart.gov
Telephone: 510.464.6990
Fax:            510.464.6901




=PTP=================================================

http://www.newstream.com/us/story_pub.shtml?story_id=10985&user_ip=
66.69.194.85

Newstream
October 2003

JetTrain High-Speed Rail Locomotive Rolls into Tampa Wednesday
Morning, October 15, 10:00 A.M.

Bombardier Transportation

WHAT:

The Bombardier¹ JetTrain¹ high-speed rail locomotive has arrived in
Florida. After recent visits to Miami and Orlando, the next-generation
locomotive will be at Tampa's Union Station, Track 3, Wednesday
morning, October 15, at 10:00 a.m.

With a jet engine placed in the heart of the JetTrain locomotive, it is the
first non-electric high-speed rail solution designed for the American
market. With top speeds exceeding 150 miles per hour, it offers
passengers a new way to travel between cities every day in safety,
comfort and speed.

Bombardier is currently short listed with partner Fluor Corporation to
design, build, operate and maintain Florida's first high-speed rail system
that will link Tampa and Orlando and, ultimately, Orlando and Miami. The
Fluor-Bombardier proposal features JetTrain technology - the only non-
electric, FRA-compliant, high-speed rail technology in the world.

Fluor Corporation and Bombardier Transportation are inviting members of
the media for a technical briefing on the JetTrain technology, followed by
a photo-op of the locomotive.

WHO:

Ms. Lecia Stewart, vice-president, High-Speed Rail, North America,
Bombardier Transportation

Mr. Jerry Holloway, director, Media Relations, Fluor Corporation

WHEN & WHERE:

Tampa - Wednesday, October 15, 2003

Media briefing:

Tampa Union Station, 601 N. Nebraska Ave.
Baggage Room
10:00 - 10:30 a.m.

Photo-op:

Tampa Union Station, 601 N. Nebraska Ave., Track #3
10:30 - 11:00 a.m.

Public viewing:

Tampa Union Station, 601 N. Nebraska Ave., Track #3
12:00 - 4:00 p.m.

For more information on the Fluor-Bombardier proposal, visit
www.bombardier.com/fluor.

For more information on the Bombardier JetTrain technology, visit
www.jettrain.us.

¹ Trademark of Bombardier Inc. and/or its subsidiaries

---------------

Produced for Bombardier

Contact:

Stanton Communications
Summer Stitz, 202-223-4933
202-270-6830 (Cell)




=PTP================================================

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2003/10/14/business/64860
84&sec=business


Star Publications (Malaysia)
Tuesday October 14, 2003

KLIG confirms talks with govt

BY K.P. LEE

KL MONORAIL operator KL infrastructure Group Bhd (KLIG) has
confirmed discussions were being held with the government that could
eventually see the group or its holding company MTrans Holdings Sdn
Bhd emerging as a key player in a consortium to manage an integrated
public transport system for the federal capital.

its managing director Patrick Wong Kim Fah however declined to reveal
any details or the progress of the talks beyond saying that there was "still
a lot of discussions but ongoing."

Wong was responding to reporters' questions after the company's AGM in
Kuala Lumpur yesterday on recent speculation that MTrans was part of a
consortium with KUB Holdings Bhd and Datuk Mohd Nadzmi Salleh-
controlled Nadicorp Holdings Sdn Bhd in talks with the government on
managing the city's public transport assets.


[PHOTO]
A monorail station in Kuala Lumpur. - File Picture

it has been reported that this group would likely integrate the Klang
Valley's two light rail transit operations (Putra and STAR), the KL
monorail, as well as bus operations previously owned by Park May Bhd
and DRB-HICOM Bhd.

But it is understood that the talks have not been proceeding as smoothly
as expected.

A source told StarBiz that MTrans' talks with the government to buy Projek
Usahasama Transit Ringan Automatik Sdn Bhd and Sistem Transit Aliran
Ringan, operators of the Putra and STAR light rail transit lines
respectively, could have hit a sticky point: that of the huge debts of some
RM6bil the two companies carry in their books.

"Certainly no one wants to take on the massive assets and debts (of those
companies)," said the source.

When contacted later, KLIG executive director Lai Ying Choy declined to
comment, but said "any proposals that are ongoing will be in the best
interest of our shareholders."

On the performance of KL Monorail, the company said the current daily
users of the line, which started operations on Aug 31, was between
20,000 and 25,000 passengers on weekdays and exceeded 30,000 during
the weekends.

Lai said an operational break-even point would be reached with ridership
of around 40,000 to 50,000 passengers, which should be achieved within
a year.

"We expect to have between 60,000 and 80,000 (passengers per day)
about one year from now," Lai said, adding that the group had forecast
revenue of RM50mil in the financial year ending April 2005, the first full
year of KL Monorail's operations.

However, the group would not be posting a profit until 2007 due to the
high financing costs that would be charged to the accounts.




=PTP==============================================

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/oct03/177217.asp

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Oct. 15, 2003

Officials advance electric bus study

Review to proceed amid bid to shift funds to Metra train extension

By LARRY SANDLER
lsandler@journalsentinel.com

Local leaders voted Tuesday to keep a proposed $300 million Milwaukee
electric bus system alive - despite a move to use its main funding source
to extend Chicago's Metra commuter trains from Kenosha to Racine and
Milwaukee.

"The goal is to keep both of those projects moving forward, not to pit them
against each other," said Jim Rowen, policy chief for Mayor John O.
Norquist.

The guided electric bus system has replaced light rail as the leading
option in the Wisconsin Center District's Milwaukee Connector study of
how to link downtown attractions and nearby neighborhoods with public
transit. It could extend to Miller Park, the University of Wisconsin-
Milwaukee area and the near north side.

With preliminary study concluded, the project's four-member steering
committee decided to move the project into a more detailed phase of
study, Chairman Pete Beitzel said. The federal government would pay
most of the estimated $3 million cost of the environmental review phase,
and developer Gary Grunau has raised $400,000 in private money to
cover the local share.

Further study is needed to understand fully what the project would cost,
how it could be done and how it could be financed, Beitzel said.

Beitzel, a Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce vice
president, said city Public Works Commissioner Mariano Schifalacqua
and district President Dick Geyer joined him in a 3-0 vote to advance the
connector study.

County Executive Scott Walker has opposed guided electric buses, just as
he opposed light rail. But Walker's representative on the connector
committee, Milwaukee County Transit System Managing Director Tom
Kujawa, skipped the meeting Tuesday to discuss his agency's 2004
budget at a County Board committee meeting, bus system spokesman
Joe Caruso said.

A 1999 agreement among Norquist, then-County Executive F. Thomas
Ament and then-Gov. Tommy G. Thompson set aside $91.5 million in
federal money to implement the results of the connector study.

But with Walker's opposition stalling progress on the connector, Norquist
and Walker agreed last month to seek state and federal approval to move
the $91.5 million into the $152 million plan to extend Metra service. The
state and federal governments have not yet acted on that request.

Rowen said the connector project should move forward with the
understanding that if it is not completed, the funding should go to the
Metra extension. Beitzel said the connector study would consider that
option. The one-year environmental review of the connector would be
finished before the two years of preliminary engineering now starting on
the Metra extension.

This connector study phase also will look at whether the connector could
be operated separately from the bus system if Walker refuses to
participate, and at whether the project could be built in stages if money is
not available for the full plan, Beitzel said.

The Metra extension would run seven round trips daily, with three on
weekends and holidays, to stations in downtown Milwaukee, Cudahy,
South Milwaukee, Oak Creek, the Town of Caledonia, Racine, the Town
of Somers and Kenosha. Planners expect most passengers to use the
trains for short commuting or shopping trips rather than Milwaukee-to-
Chicago service.




=PTP===============================================

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-
octa15oct15,1,4439125.story?coll=la-headlines-california


Los Angeles Times
October 15, 2003

ORANGE COUNTY

OCTA Ready to Buy Land for CenterLine

Agency will hire expert to help acquire right of way for the light-rail line
from Santa Ana to airport. Norby says the move is premature.

By David Reyes
Times Staff Writer

Orange County transportation leaders Tuesday approved spending $5.5
million to hire a right-of-way consultant to acquire property along the
proposed 8.2-mile CenterLine light-rail route in Santa Ana.

The agency has no specific contractor in mind but will put the job out to
bid, an action that one transit board member, Orange County Supervisor
Chris Norby, criticized as premature.

Norby, who sits on the Orange County Transportation Authority board and
is a CenterLine critic, argued that bids should be done after a decision is
reached on whether Santa Ana or OCTA is responsible for acquiring
property for the light-rail project. The key issues, Norby said, are time,
organization and who will manage the land acquisition. "What happens
when people don't want to sell their houses and appeal?" Norby said.
"Aren't we putting the cart before the horse here?"

At least 480 private properties lie along CenterLine's route, which roughly
follows Bristol Street from the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center
to John Wayne Airport. The line is scheduled to open by the end of 2009.

Those properties will be acquired, either through voluntary sales or
eminent domain, after a consultant is hired by early next year. The
consultant would handle title searches, appraisals, relocation plans and
right-of-way management.

The transportation authority has projected that all properties will be
acquired and ready for construction by the end of 2007.

Revenue to pay for the consultant will come from local gas taxes and
Measure M, the sales tax approved by Orange County voters to fund
transportation projects.

Transit board member Cassie DeYoung initially challenged the agency's
plan to hire the consultant because of the uncertainty of federal support
for the project, estimated to cost $900 million.

The federal government is supposed to provide 15% of the funding, but
the transportation authority has yet to receive any word from Washington.
The authority is competing for funds with transportation projects from
across the country.

DeYoung later voted for hiring a consultant.

Norby said he was concerned about potential appeals from homeowners
and other property owners. If only 5% of the estimated property owners
appealed eminent domain action, 24 hearings would have to be held by
either Santa Ana or the authority, he said.

"I just hope those who support CenterLine really know what you are
getting into here," Norby said.

The vote was 8 to 2 to hire a consultant, with Norby and Supervisor Bill
Campbell dissenting.

A recent poll conducted by the Orange County Business Council showed
that 55% of county residents who had an opinion on the CenterLine
project support the light-rail project, even though it has been shortened
repeatedly because of a lack of political support.



=PTP================================================

Salt Lake Tribune
TUESDAY October 14, 2003

S. Davis mayors OK transit master plan

By Lori Buttars

    Mayors in six South Davis cities are fighting for their piece of the mass-
transit pie.
    Leaders from Farmington, Centerville, Bountiful, West Bountiful, Woods
Cross and North Salt Lake and county officials have signed off on an
aggressive new master plan calling for a 1/2-cent tax hike in Weber, Davis
and Salt Lake counties to fast-track $9.8 billion in Wasatch Front transit
projects.
    The proposal includes bus rapid transit as an alternative mode of travel
between Salt Lake City and south Davis County.
    Such a system -- with express buses traveling along dedicated street
lanes and getting priority at traffic lights -- is part of the first phase of the
new long-range plan that would be in place by 2012, according to Sam
Klemm, spokesman for transportation planners at the Wasatch Front
Regional Council.
    "Before that, we didn't have [south Davis County on the plan for
widespread transit improvements] for about 20 years," Klemm said.
    Klemm says the plan, which also proposes light-rail extensions to Sugar
House in Salt Lake City, Draper, the Salt Lake Valley's west side and Salt
Lake City international Airport, is open for public comment until Nov. 4.
    The updated master plan is welcome news in south Davis County,
where six mayors last year petitioned the WFRC for their own TRAX light-
rail extension.
    Light rail to the north of Salt Lake City did not make the list for the next
three decades.
    While bus rapid transit isn't TRAX, Bountiful Mayor Joe Johnson is
warming to the idea.
    "Hey, it's a start," he says. "And there are a lot of benefits to it. It's more
cost effective, and those buses can pull off main line and head up the
street if they need to. That gives us an east-west option that won't be
there with TRAX for years to come."
    Johnson's biggest concern is that voters will be turned off by the idea of
raising taxes to pay for what they might perceive as only a "bus system."
    He says he remembers that crisp day in the fall 2001 when he went into
the polling booth and voted in favor of increasing sales taxes a quarter-
cent to pay for improved transit options in Davis County.
    "They might have said 'commuter rail' [on the ballot], but I -- and a lot of
other people I know -- were thinking TRAX," he said. Commuter rail, a
high-speed train system between Salt Lake City and Ogden with two
Davis County stops, is planned to begin service by 2007.
    Officials from the six south Davis cities are chipping in $35,000 to help
pay for a $100,000 feasibility study designed to gauge their citizens'
support and which transportation modes fit with the county's needs. The
study would also examine potential ridership and routes.
    The Utah Transit Authority is putting in $45,000, Salt Lake City is
contributing $10,000 and Davis County is paying $10,000.
    South Davis County has nearly 250,000 residents. Projections show
that number swelling to 500,000 by 2030. WFRC planners already know
that half of the county's daily commuters travel into Salt Lake County for
jobs. Traffic clogs interstate 15 for nearly five hours of rush-hour gridlock
each weekday.
    With few alternatives for motorists along that narrow stretch between
the Great Salt Lake and the Wasatch mountains, commutes can be
completely shut down because of jackknifed semis, automobile fender-
benders and construction.
    "Any time anything happens out here, you're done," says Layton
resident Russell Kuck, who travels to downtown Salt Lake City each
workday. "it's not safe to not have an alternative route when things like
that come up, and they happen more often than you think."
    The study would show whether south Davis County could sustain its
own intracity transit system in conjunction with I-15 and, eventually, the
Legacy Highway -- a four-lane road planned for south Davis County -- and
the new commuter-rail line.
    South Davis officials contend commuter rail and Legacy Highway are
necessary, but an intracity rapid transit system is the missing piece to
solving gridlock.
    "We are doing this assuming Legacy Highway gets built [and] assuming
commuter rail gets going," said Centerville Mayor Michael Deamer. "This
will be an assessment of our citizens' needs 20 to 30 years down the road
with the idea that we will get TRAX one day."
    The mayors expect most residents are receptive to the idea. Bountiful's
Johnson notes that TRAX didn't catch on with Salt Lake commuters until
after it was built and people saw it in action.
    "If [TRAX] were here, I think people would already be using it," Johnson
says. "Commuter rail is going to be great, but we are so close to Salt Lake
City, and if you have to cross the freeway entrance to get on commuter
rail, most of our residents are going to say 'to heck with it, I'll just drive.' "
    The biggest roadblock for residents might be other proposed county
projects.
    Davis taxpayers are still in shock after last year when Davis County
Commissioners proposed raising property taxes by 138 percent.
    Commissioners ended up raising taxes by 24 percent, but they made
no secret that they will soon be back with plans to raise taxes again to pay
for a bigger jail.
    "These are both services that people depend on government to
provide," said Farmington Mayor David Connors. "Of the two, the
transportation tax is probably a little more optional, but any forward-
thinking individual knows that waiting on this will mean we are in such
gridlock that we won't be able to react."
    lorib@sltrib.com



=PTP===============================================

http://www.azcentral.com/newa/articles/1014palms.html

Arizona Republic
Oct. 14, 2003

Saving trees a tall task for light-rail planners


[PHOTO]
Tom Tingle/The Arizona Republic
Skyscrapers now tower over those old palms, which will be removed to
make way for light rail. Planners want to return them to the same Central
Avenue stretch.

Historic palms on Central

Angela Cara Pancrazio

We have the native paloverde, saguaro and the ocotillo.

So who would expect that the icon of Central Avenue would be an import?

The palm trees that have guarded Central Avenue from McDowell Road to
Encanto Boulevard in Phoenix for 101 years are California palms.

And they now pose a costly challenge to city officials, who must move
them twice because of the impending light-rail project.

Dwight and Maie Heard, who established the Heard Museum on Central
Avenue, brought them here.

After building their home northeast of Central Avenue and Monte Vista
Road in 1902, the Heards planted hundreds of palm trees along streets in
the Los Olivos subdivision, including a double row along the east side of
Central Avenue.

The Heards believed the palms would lure buyers to the upscale
neighborhood. As competition edged in, developers on the west side of
Central Avenue copied the Heards' ploy.

Now, the street must be widened to accommodate the two light-rail
stations north of Encanto and south of McDowell and left turns for motor
vehicles at McDowell, Palm Lane and Encanto.

The city must preserve the stately palms because they are eligible for
historic designation.

Before construction begins next summer, light-rail officials must work with
city and state historic preservation offices to decide how to deal with the
trees.


Back to Central


The plan is to remove the 110 palm trees during construction, then return
them to the same stretch on Central Avenue. The cost of removal, nursery
storage and replanting is $3,000 per tree.

"Historic properties are not just buildings," said Barbara Stocklin, the city's
historic preservation officer. "Sites, objects and streetscapes can be
historic."

if this were the halcyon days of urban renewal in the 1960s, the trees
would simply be knocked down in the name of progress.

"With urban renewal and growth of the interstate highways, many historic
resources were being bowled over," said Carl Wolf of the National Trust
for Historic Preservation in Washington, D.C.

Not anymore.

By 1966, the National Transportation Act and National Historic
Preservation Act were passed to stop haphazard demolition. Now the
federal Transit Administration and the National Trust for Historic
Preservation collaborate to blend progress while maintaining a sense of
place.

"If you relocate the trees do you destroy the historic fabric of Central?"
asked Terry Phemister of Valley Metro. "It was our contention that, no, it
does not. When the project is done, we will end up with a palm-tree lined
streetscape."

That suits Phoenix native Scott Leyva, 41. "They're stately and very
Phoenix," Leyva said.

"And if I were king for a day I would take Seventh Street, Seventh Avenue,
McDowell Road and Thomas and give it back to the neighborhoods and
make them tree-lined streets."


Worries of damage


Leyva is worried that moving the trees could damage them.

"Being that old and tall, I would think a lot of them will expire if they are
moved," he said.

But Bill Benson, an 82-year-old Mesa resident and a date palm grower
since 1949, said the trees would survive.

"There are people equipped to do this correctly," Benson said. "I've grown
palms from all over the world, in all that time I never sprayed one for
disease, they're well adapted in this area, they can take a lot of drought."

The effort is worth it, he said.

"it's very unique, I mean to have a main street with tall palms like that. It
reminds you of the tropics."



Reach the reporter at angela.pancrazio@arizonarepublic.com or (602)
444-8126.



=PTP==============================================

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/15/nyregion/15TRAC.html?ei=1&en=c1e
54987ba5db22a&ex=1067211046&pagewanted=print&position=

New York Times
October 15, 2003

Spate of Suicides illustrates the Railroads' Morbid Lure

By RONALD SMOTHERS

NEWARK, Oct. 14 — in Manville, N.J., last Friday a killer apparently tried
to disguise his crime by placing the victim's body on the freight rail tracks,
where it might be viewed simply as another suicide under the wheels of
the 6:20 train.

On Sunday in Morristown, Bruce DeHart, a construction worker putting in
some overtime hours refurbishing the train station, noticed the hubbub
around the station where a 37-year-old man had committed suicide by
stepping into the path of an oncoming train. He thought for a moment that
it was just another death of one of the homeless alcoholics who live in
makeshift camps around the railroad tracks and occasionally meet their
end there.

Two weeks ago, when the blare of an express train horn sounded, only to
have the train stopped screechingly at the Short Hills station, Jim Cook,
the attendant at the Citgo Gas Station about 50 yards away, knew
immediately what had happened.

And on Tuesday, a motorcyclist who sped around a railroad crossing bar
in Hazlet, in an apparent effort to beat the oncoming train, lost the race
and was killed when the train struck him.

There have been three suicides and one accidental death on the 975
miles of New Jersey Transit railroad tracks in the last two weeks. It began
with an unemployed Short Hills banker who killed himself Sept. 29, and
continued on Sunday with the suicide of James Thomas Kelly, 37, who
was instrumental in organizing New Jersey residents who had been
abused by priests. On the same day in Millington, a woman crouched
down on the tracks in front of an oncoming train, a railroad spokeswoman
said. The deaths continued further with the motorcyclist on Tuesday.

But rather than an unexpected spike in such incidents, they are a
reflection of a morbid fact of life in New Jersey. Death on the tracks — at
the rate of about 25 a year — is common enough that residents near the
tracks can sense the cues and New Jersey Transit officials have a regular
counseling program in place for engineers and other crew members
whose trains are involved in what they euphemistically call "critical
incidents," whether they be accidents or suicides.

"I've had three myself in 35 years of service, and I can still picture each
one of them," said Bob Vallochi, general chairman of the union
representing the commuter line's engineers. "I remember how I was
treated then, when there was a more callous attitude of getting right back
in the saddle. Now you don't have to just shut it out."

Engineers like Mr. Vallochi and Wayne Pierson, who has been at the
controls of locomotives for 38 years, insist that the incidents are not
increasing. It is just the reporting of them that is increasing, they say, now
that the rail lines are larger and publicly owned and touch on more and
more commuter lives in the state's sprawling suburbs.

And because the rail lines are so extensive, such "suicides by locomotive"
or accidents are almost impossible to prevent, said Penny Bassett
Hackett, a spokeswoman for New Jersey Transit.

"You cannot fence in a railroad," she said. "Plus a fence is not a deterrent
to anything because if a person wants to access the railroad tracks, they
can."

There were 27 deaths on New Jersey Transit tracks last year, and with the
accident involving the motorcyclist today the number this year stands at
19, said Ms. Bassett Hackett. And lore among engineers nationwide is
that the numbers increase rapidly during holiday periods.

John Tolman, the assistant to the president of the Brotherhood of
Locomotive Engineers, the national union for the train operators, said that
the problem of death on the tracks is a national one. He said the union,
the Federal Railway Agency and the railroads are currently two years into
a study of how to best minister to the train crews who suffer this trauma.

"And the commuter rail line is the primary place for people to commit
suicide, largely because there are more frequent trains traveling at high
speeds to populated areas," he said.

Each incident leaves its own sad residue.

in Morristown, where Mr. Kelly walked onto the tracks to be struck by a
train early Sunday morning, Mohamed Ramadan, owner of Bagel
Brothers, said that he didn't know the reasons behind the suicide, but
offered his own curbside sense of a pervasive depression among his
customers because of the economy. A group that once seemed more
focused, hurried and directed seemed now more aimless and tentative.

"I have noticed a lot of my customers that used to come in and grab a
quick bite to eat are now staying for longer periods of time because they
just don't have jobs to rush off to," he said.

A way down the tracks of the Morris and Essex line in Short Hills, when
Richard Josephs, an unemployed banker, stepped in front of a train near
the Short Hills station Sept. 29 after strangling his 7-year-old son, people
assumed the stresses of the economy were to blame. Mr. Cook, the gas
station attendant, was still mystified by such a tragedy "in this day and age
when all you need to do is throw up your hands and say, 'Help,' " in order
to get counseling and assistance.

The train station in Millington on the Somerset-Morris County border is the
Millington Station Cafe, a coffee shop in a small, gray stone building
whose eight windows are decorated with flower boxes sporting fuschia
and white blooms. It was near the station on Sunday morning that
Veronica Henderson, 53, a Basking Ridge resident, crouched down on the
tracks in front of a New Jersey Transit train, according to Ms. Bassett
Hackett.

Melissa Ferrera, 19, a waitress at the station cafe for the last three years,
was visibly troubled by the incident and found herself wondering if Ms.
Henderson had been among the so many anonymous faces she waited
on. Everyone was shocked and concerned, she said, adding that even the
train horns had a different sound that day.

"They seemed more melancholy," she said.








PTP Digest 2003/10/14-A = CONTENTS

* Houston: 'Metro rail supporters strike back'
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 13, 2003

* Houston:  Rail foe tries, fails to block election
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 13, 2003

* Cincinnati: intrigues of regional road/LRT decision
   CINCINNATI POST 10-13-2003

* Orlando plan loss shows US voters balking at new transport taxes
   USA Today Oct. 12, 2003



=PTP=============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 13, 2003

Metro rail supporters strike back with own ads

By LUCAS WALL


After two weeks of fending off blows from opponents of Metro's transit
plan, light rail supporters took the offensive Monday, unveiling a logo and
television advertising campaign urging "Vote YES! Rail/Buses/Roads/No
New Taxes."

Their call was backed Monday by the endorsement of a black ministers'
coalition.

Rail foes, including U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, have battered
proponents of Metro's Nov. 4 transit-expansion referendum in recent
weeks, accusing the transit authority of inflating its sales-tax and federal-
funding estimates. Texans for True Mobility, an organization formed last
month by developer Michael Stevens, is sponsoring ads urging voters to
defeat the proposition.

At a news conference turned pep rally Monday afternoon at Mount Sinai
Baptist Church in The Heights, leaders of the black community extolled
the value of extending Houston's first light rail line, set to open Jan. 1.

"If you don't want to ride in your car, you ought to have an alternative kind
of transportation," said Samuel Gilbert, president of the Houston
Metropolitan Baptist Ministers Conference and a member of the
Metropolitan Transit Authority's board of directors. "We are still bickering
and dividing the community over something that should have been done
at least 30 years ago."

Mayor Lee Brown, unable to seek re-election due to term limits, used the
rally to make his first public endorsement of the referendum.

"We must work now to prevent future gridlock," Brown said. "Without
taking care of the transportation needs of our city, Houston goes
backward."

Brown said people will not want to visit or relocate to Houston if it remains
"a city of creeping traffic and air quality that is heavy with emissions."

The transit-expansion plan voters weigh next month, which includes a
$640 million bond issue to accelerate construction of the next 22 miles of
light rail, will be a huge benefit to the black community, Gilbert said. His
said his conference represents 225 pastors and more than 100,000
churchgoers, mostly inner-city minorities whose votes are considered
crucial for passage of Metro's plan. The organized opponents of rail
expansion are mostly white conservatives who reside outside Loop 610.

Gilbert said the majority of Metro's bus riders today are minorities who
deserve better transit service.

"Most people in our community don't drive these high-powered cars. They
are the ones who really need the transportation," Gilbert said after the
rally. "We're trying to put the first piece [of rail] in the inner-city."

Another group of black ministers plans a news conference today to
announce its opposition to the Metro plan. Bobby Mills, an associate
pastor at Pleasant Grove Missionary Baptist Church, said the Baptist
Ministers Association is afraid Metro will divert funds to light rail and
shortchange bus service.

At Monday's announcement, State Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston,
said residents who live beyond the Loop should support the transit plan as
well because trains will never reach the suburbs if the Main Street line is
not expanded.

"This is the first installment on a major transportation system," said
Turner, who Gilbert's conference has endorsed for mayor. "You can't get
there until you vote 'yes' on Nov. 4."

Several speakers pointed out Houston is the only large American city
without rail transit and its future is at stake if voters decline to expand the
first line.

"Once we have done this, I think we will be on our road to creating the sort
of city that can be more than competitive," Turner said.

Bill White, another mayoral candidate supports the Metro plan, while
Orlando Sanchez opposes it.

After the event, Citizens for Public Transportation showed its first
television commercial. The political action committee, led by developer Ed
Wulfe, touts the benefits of light rail over traffic-clogged freeways in the
ads. They began broadcasting Monday.

"This gets the message out there that the train is sleek, it's modern, it
helps reduce pollution, and obviously it relieves congestion," Wulfe said,
"in spite of what Stevens says."


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2155125



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 13, 2003, 10:34PM

Rail opponent's complaint is dismissed

Metro board member's residency was questioned

By LUCAS WALL


The Harris County clerk on Monday dismissed a complaint by a rail
opponent seeking to keep Metro's transit-expansion referendum off the
Nov. 4 ballot because one of its Houston-appointed board members does
not live in the city.

Al Hartman, in an Oct. 1 letter to Clerk Beverly Kaufman, questioned
whether Don Wang's residence violates a Houston city ordinance
requiring that mayoral appointments reside in the city. Wang lives in Piney
Point, one of six villages surrounded by the west side of Houston.

Kaufman responded to Hartman's complaint Monday, saying that legal
opinions by Houston and the Metropolitan Transit Authority both find that
Wang's appointment is valid because the city ordinance applies only to
city boards and commissions. Metro is a regional authority.

Also, the opinions state, Metro is governed by a state law that requires
only that its board members reside in the transit service area. Piney Point
is one of the 15 cities, plus parts of unincorporated Harris County, that
belong to Metro.

"Based on this information and the fact that as a contracting officer for the
conduct of elections on behalf of Metro," Kaufman wrote Hartman, "my
office has no official jurisdiction to prevent the printing/development of
ballots for the Nov. 4, 2003, joint election, we will continue to move
forward with our election preparations."

Hartman said he understands Kaufman's opinion and does not plan to
appeal. However, he said, it is outrageous that Mayor Lee Brown would
appoint a resident of another city to one of Houston's five Metro board
seats. Piney Point and 13 other small cities have two representatives on
Metro's board, and Harris County also has two.

Wang was in the majority two months ago when Metro's board voted 5-4
to place the transit-expansion plan on the ballot. Hartman contended that
if Wang was in violation of the law, his vote must be invalidated. That
would have resulted in a 4-4 tie causing the "Metro Solutions" proposal to
fail.

"Even though technically it's legal, it doesn't make any common sense" to
have a city board member who doesn't live in Houston, Hartman said.

Hartman lives in Houston and runs a management company that owns
and operates commercial properties. Hartman said he has given money to
Texans for True Mobility, an organization fighting Metro's plan but
declined to say how much.

Brown defended his appointment of Wang, describing him as "a good
businessman who cares about our city and gives his time to the Metro
board." Wang is chairman of MetroBank, which has nine area branches
and is unaffiliated with the transit authority.

"He does not have to live in the city," Brown said. "it's a metropolitan
board."

The mayor called Hartman's complaint "another desperate grasp at trying
to defeat something that is good for the city."

Wang could not be reached for comment.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2155694



=PTP===========================================

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/10/13/edita101303.html

CINCINNATI POST
10-13-2003

EDITORIAL

A curious approach

The decision-making process for highway projects has long been
shrouded in fog, even for those who keep up with local government. It's
never quite clear who really decides what will happen, or when, or how it
all is paid for.

in this respect the deliberations over rebuilding I-75 between the Ohio
River and Dayton has been unusually transparent. The broad-picture
options have been developed, reviewed and voted on by a committee of
the Ohio-Kentucky-indiana Regional Council of Governments that
included representatives of the communities within the I-75 right of way.
The option picked by the committee -- widening the highway to at least
four through lanes, along with a light rail line in the I-75 corridor -- was
then sent to the full OKI board, which last week endorsed the proposal.

Still, there are aspects of the decision, and the process, that are, well,
peculiar. Consider:

* The vote on what will be the single largest public works project in
recent memory -- the official cost estimate is $1.8 billion, but the actual
cost will likely be much higher -- comes at a time when OKI has no
executive director. Former director Jim Duane's retirement took effect last
month, and OKI's search committee has yet to name a successor.

* With only three dissenting votes, OKI's governing board (those who
showed  up, anyway) gave its blessing to the widening/light rail plan. But
the  three "No'' votes came from people who represent the largest political
subdivisions along I-75 within Hamilton County: Cincinnati, Norwood and
the Hamilton County Commissioners.

John Cranley, a member of Cincinnati City Council, voted no because the
plan doesn't widen the highway through the city enough to suit him; he's
concerned that with traffic moving more freely in the suburbs, bottlenecks
will develop on the portion of I-75 within the city. (Then again, even
though he represents Cincinnati on the OKI board he really didn't,
because
Cincinnati City Council voted to endorse the expansion/light rail plan.)

Hamilton County Commissioner John Dowlin (accurately reflecting the
majority position at his shop) voted "No,'' mainly because he thinks light
rail would be a waste of money and do little to relieve congestion. He also
wants OKI to promote short-term measures (including an I-75 truck ban)
to reduced congestion.

Norwood City Council member MaryAnn Burwinkel cited concerns about
property that might be taken for a light rail line.

* OKI endorsed the lane expansion-light rail combination even though the
prospects for funding the $1 billion light rail project are, to put it
mildly, uncertain. Put it this way: transit systems here and across the
country are having an increasingly difficult time paying even for bus
service; Washington is already inundated with light rail funding requests;
Ohio has a constitutional prohibition against the use of state gasoline tax
revenues for non-highway purposes; and Hamilton County voters last year
overwhelmingly rejected a sales tax for a light rail/expanded bus system.

* Even though the near-term prospects for light rail are slim, and even
though the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority isn't trying to revive
the rail plan, Hamilton County commissioners have just named two overt
light rail opponents to SORTA's seven-member governing board. Dowlin
says the new appointees, Stephan Louis (who led opposition to the rail
plan last year) and Daniel Peters (president of the Buckeye institute, a
conservative think tank), while they oppose rail, support bus-based transit.
That assertion has been greeted with deep suspicion by transit advocates;
frankly, it's hard to imagine Louis or Peters hitting the stump to promote,
say, a countywide or regional tax to expand the bus system (something
that should have happened three decades ago.)

Now here's the most mysterious aspect of all. Even though OKI is
leaderless
and is saddled with an over-large, unwieldy governing board, even though
there is deep dissention over the I-75 "preferred alternative'' that OKI
just adopted, even though prospects for light rail are dim, even though the
region's largest transit board is being salted with appointees whose
affinity for transit is questionable, the sky is not falling.

indeed, for I-75, the essential pieces of the rebuilding project are going
forward in a fairly rational way. The first contracts will soon be let for
preliminary design work to upgrade the most dangerous interchanges.
The road-widening plan that OKI approved is as restrained as one could
hope -- we're not going to widen I-75 monstrously -- and should indeed
move cars and trucks more quickly, safely and efficiently. A study has
been ordered to investigate ways to encourage the movement of freight
off trucks and onto railroad cars.

But that outcome, it would appear, comes in spite of, not because of, the
governing processes of the institutions responsible for transportation in
Greater Cincinnati.



=PTP===============================================

USA Today
Oct. 12, 2003


Nation's voters put brakes on taxes for transportation

Dennis Cauchon

The defeat of a proposal to raise taxes for road construction in Orlando
had none of the drama of Arnold Schwarzenegger's campaign to become
governor of California. But what happened Tuesday may be even more
telling about the recent anti-tax drift of voters in state and local politics.


By 54 to 46 percent, Orlando voters rejected a half-cent sales tax increase
that would have raised $2.6 billion over 20 years to expand highways,
build sidewalks and bike paths and start a light-rail system.


The defeat surprised political and business leaders who had spent about
$2 million to support the proposal, referred to as the Mobility 20/20 plan.
Polls had predicted the tax would win easy approval.


Also on Tuesday, California voters rejected, 64 to 36 percent, a
proposition that would have required the Legislature to dedicate more
money to infrastructure projects such as roads.


"There's an undercurrent of mistrust of government out there, and we rode
it all the way to the beach," said Doug Guetzloe, chairman of Ax the Tax,
which opposed the Orlando proposal.


He said the California recall helped defeat the Orlando transportation
proposal by focusing attention on how government mismanages money.
The transportation issue was the only item on the ballot in Orlando, but
the 23 percent voter turnout was higher than voting officials had expected.


The Orlando vote was one of a string of failed tax efforts in the past
month.



• in Alabama, voters rejected a $1.2 billion overhaul of the state's tax
system that was proposed by Republican Gov. Bob Riley and supported
by many business leaders.



• in Seattle, voters rejected, 68 to 32 percent, a proposal to tax espresso
coffee to fund day care for the poor. As in Orlando, polls had predicted the
espresso tax would pass easily.


Transportation projects might be most affected by the anti-tax sentiment.
The average American spends 51 minutes a day commuting, the Census
Bureau says.


Cash-strapped state and local governments have increasingly asked
voters to approve special taxes for transportation projects. Last year,
there were 42 state and local transportation initiatives; half passed. On
Nov. 4, citizens from Maine to Washington state will vote on transportation
proposals.


State and local spending on roads fell 7.7 percent in the first eight months
of 2003 vs. 2002, the American Road and Transportation Builders
Association says. Advocates for more spending on roads complain that
states have raided funds dedicated for roads and used the money to
balance budgets.


"We're destroying the trust of the voters when we don't do what we
promise on transportation projects," said Doug Callaway, president of
Floridians for Better Transportation, a business and local government
group that advocates more highway spending.


Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and the Legislature took $200 million from that
state's transportation fund this year and spent it elsewhere, Callaway said.


The Orlando proposal would have expanded interstate 4, which runs
through Orlando and near Disney World, by adding four toll lanes next to
the eight free ones. Critics called these "Lexus" lanes because affluent
people would be the drivers most likely to pay tolls for uncrowded
highways.


U.S. Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., a member of the House Transportation
Committee, said the toll lanes, more than anti-tax sentiment, doomed the
Orlando transportation proposal.


"it's hard to pass even a small tax increase in down economic times, but it
would have passed if it hadn't been for the toll roads," said Mica, whose
district includes Orlando suburbs. He said the country is facing a serious
road problem because of inadequate federal funding and an unwillingness
of local voters to pay for improvements.


Republican leaders in Congress want to raise the 18.4-cent-per-gallon
federal gas tax by 5 to 12 cents. President Bush opposes a gas tax
increase.


Federal highway spending, which is approved every six years, was
supposed to be determined last month. Dispute over the gas tax forced
Congress to extend the old program by five months while it negotiates
with the White House. For drivers, the results may be a trade-off: lower
taxes, but more time in cars.


http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/1012gridlock12.html







PTP Digest 2003/10/13-A = CONTENTS

* Houston: Great Debate over rail plan
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 12, 2003

* Houston eyes Dallas's LRT success, while foes decry 'failure'
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 12, 2003

* Houston: Myths, facts on Metro Solutions rail/transit plan
   Houston Transportation Bulletin October 7, 2003

* Austin pol touts 'commuter' rail, disses LRT
   Austin Business Journal  October 6, 2003

* Boston Silver Line BRT: New artic's wheel falls off
   Boston Herald Tuesday, October 7, 2003

* Boston Silver Line BRT: New artic buses have noise, vibration
   Boston Globe 10/12/2003

* Phoenix: Transit agency preps community for LRT construction
   The Arizona Republic Oct. 12, 2003


=PTP=========================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 12, 2003


Fight over rail goes head-to-head

Local congressmen, others state their cases in TV debate

By LUCAS WALL

Two local members of Congress and leaders of the major groups
supporting and opposing Metro's Nov. 4 transit-expansion referendum
squared off face-to-face for the first time in a televised debate Sunday
morning.

The discussion, broadcast on KPRC-TV Channel 2's half-hour
Newsmakers program, allowed the parties to sit down and confront each
other after a couple weeks of trading barbs through oft-heated letters and
news conferences.

Rep. Nick Lampson, D-Beaumont, said that over time Metro's plan to add
22 miles of light rail by 2012 will reduce traffic congestion. But that's not
the most important issue voters need to weigh, he said.

"It is more about choices and making sure we compete with the rest of the
communities in the country, to make sure people have the choices to be
able to travel in a manner in which they want," Lampson said. "They need
to have options to avoid getting into an automobile."

Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, continued his attack of the Metropolitan
Transit Authority proposition, which includes a $640 million bond issue to
accelerate construction of those 22 rail miles.

"Every dollar we spend is so precious that it must be directed at projects
that will reduce congestion and improve travel time," Culberson said. "My
principal concern and objection to Metro's plan is that they admit
themselves it will not reduce congestion. It deals with only 1 percent of
people using our roads yet will cost up to $9 billion. So we simply can't
afford it. We need to solve 100 percent of our traffic problems, not just 1
percent."

Metro takes issue with several of Culberson's contentions. The transit
authority has said that adding light rail might not reduce current traffic
congestion because of the phenomenal population growth projected for
Harris County. However, Metro consultant Steve Beard has said the
problem will only get worse if some form of rapid transit is not built.

The transit authority's projections indicate 1.1 percent of Harris County
residents will ride light rail in 2025. But, Metro points out, it's unfair to
measure light rail's success by the entire county's population since many
residents are schoolchildren, homemakers or retirees who do not make
typical work commutes. Light rail will have a great impact in certain
corridors, Metro argues, pointing out its bus system today carries about
one-fourth of work trips into downtown.


Ed Wulfe, a developer who chairs Citizens for Public Transportation, said
light rail absolutely will have an impact on traffic.

"Every time you take one car off the road and put [the driver] on a public
transportation system, light rail or bus, it reduces congestion one at a
time," Wulfe said. "The fact is you've got to get people off the roads."

Edd Hendee, treasurer of the Texans for True Mobility political action
committee, pushed the group's message of more highway investment.

"You can't spend all your transit money on a plan that takes one car off
the road. We need something that allows us room to drive our cars," said
Hendee, a westside businessman and part-time host on conservative talk
radio.

Hendee cited statistics showing the number of vehicles in Harris County
since 1990 has exceeded new highway lane miles by four times.

"If you've got 43 percent more cars and only 11 percent more roads,
you've got a road problem, you don't have a train problem," Hendee said.

Rail opponents contend there's not enough money available for Metro's
plan. Lampson responded that adding trains will reduce the need for more
highway construction, something he said the region definitely can't afford.

The Houston-Galveston Area Council has estimated the metropolitan area
will need more than $11 billion in additional money beyond current funding
sources if it is to reduce traffic congestion by 2025 with more asphalt and
concrete. And that estimate does not include buying right of way, which
would add several billion more dollars to the pricetag and destroy
numerous homes and businesses.

"If the money is short for this project, it is certainly going to be short three
times more to go for the 100 percent [highway] solution," Lampson said.
"We are taking a positive step right now to give people a choice."


This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2153935




=PTP=============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 12, 2003


Dallas' light rail going full steam

Transit debaters here look to city's successes, problems

By LUCAS WALL

DALLAS -- Those fighting for more light rail in Houston look here with
envy at crowded trains, full Park & Ride lots at rail stations and an
estimated $1.3 billion in economic development along the tracks.

Opponents of expanding Metro's Main Street line, which is set to open
Jan. 1, cast a different eye north to the only Texas city with light rail
operating. They view it as a failure and are citing the budget woes of
Dallas Area Rapid Transit as an example of why Houston voters must
reject the Nov. 4 transit-expansion referendum.

"Dallas has invested billions in light rail, and it did not work," said Michael
Stevens, chairman of the coalition opposing the Metropolitan Transit
Authority's $4.6 billion expansion proposition. "They are broke. They have
cut back bus service, they are cutting light rail service back, and they
haven't relieved congestion."

Though Metro's plan includes 44 extra bus routes, additional HOV lanes
and $774 million in new road work, the debate is squarely focused on
whether light rail will improve mobility and spur dense, pedestrian-friendly
development. The proposal includes a $640 million bond issue to
accelerate construction of the next 22 miles of light rail by 2012.

Stevens' group, Texans for True Mobility, is blasting DART, including in a
four-page color ad mailed to thousands of Houston-area voters last week
as Dallas-area commuters saw cuts in their bus and train service.

"Dallas already tried this experiment, and it has failed," the ad states.
"Dallas has 44 miles of light rail, but their mass transit system is actually
losing ridership and cutting routes. Also, they are facing a $37 million
shortfall and have had to ask for federal assistance."

DART executives acknowledge these are tough times because of a slump
in sales-tax collections but say it is erroneous to blame the troubles on
their $1.9 billion light rail system.

"We're not going broke," said DART President and Executive Director
Gary Thomas, dismissing the notion with a laugh.

Thomas and his colleagues brag about the success of their rail system.
They point to increased ridership as the lines have been extended and
tout their economic benefits, taking a reporter to numerous apartments,
stores, restaurants, offices and hotels that have sprouted along the rail
line since its 1996 opening.

"Sales tax revenue throughout the country is not doing as well as it had
throughout the 1990s," Thomas said. "That's nothing associated with light
rail. That's just part of the economy."

DART last week eliminated 16 bus routes, modified 39 routes and
increased the time between midday trains from 15 to 20 minutes. Earlier
this year, it pushed back completion of the next light rail line from 2007 to
2010, laid off dozens of employees and requested $18 million in
maintenance funds from the federal government.

Thomas described the request as routine, noting that Metro uses federal
funds to extend the life of its buses.

But rail opponents in Houston have pounced on DART's shortfall, arguing
such a fate awaits Metro if voters give the green light, because light rail is
too expensive.

Thomas said such claims are "disconcerting."

Sue Bauman, DART vice president for marketing and communications,
said Houston rail critics are so obsessed with budget numbers, they are
missing the real story: Light rail "has changed the urban face of Dallas"
and is tremendously popular.

"The people up here like this project," Bauman said. "Our problem is we
can't build it fast enough. It's liked in all parts of the city. More parts of the
city want it; they are supportive. The suburban areas want it. Cities that
are not even in DART want it, and we can't provide it."

interviews with DART passengers during a recent Friday afternoon rush
hour found heaps of praise for rail.

Glynnis Slater, gazing out the window of a Red Line train zooming to
Plano, said her drive to work downtown was horrendous, in terms of time
and money, after she and her husband moved to the northern suburb.

"When we bought the house out here, I was slowly going crazy because
of the bumper-to-bumper traffic," Slater said. "For me, it's great because
it's not just saving money -- obviously there's the economics of it -- but for
me DART's done a good job of keeping it clean, keeping it safe.

"The fact is, I'm not coming home ready to scream."

DART officials also speak proudly of the development spawned by the rail
lines. Thomas said real estate agents have told him that "a large
percentage of their market wants to live near a rail station. They want to
be close to what's going on and want to be close to transportation
alternatives."

At Mockingbird station in north Dallas, an urban village has emerged with
211 luxury lofts, a movie theater, restaurants, offices and shops. Across
the tracks, there are another 500 new apartments.

Between two downtown rail stops, a 1,900-room Adam's Mark has opened
-- the largest hotel in Texas. The city center now contains the revamped
West End entertainment district, a new basketball arena, renovated office
towers and more residences. DART trains run through downtown along
streets turned into a European-style pedestrian mall.

To the south, the old, industrial Cedars area has recently become home
to Dallas police headquarters and projects such as the conversion of an
old Sears warehouse into South Side on Lamar, a 455-loft residential
complex near the DART station. The building includes a coffee shop,
minimart, video store, flower shop, dry cleaners and other services.

"What you've got going here is this development community overcoming
two big stereotypes," said Peter Coughlin, who manages South Side.
"One is that rail won't work in a Sunbelt city. But Dallas is responding to
light rail and mass transit. Another thing is that you can't come into an
urban area and turn it around. We're doing that."

Even the suburbs are benefiting, with 450 new apartments built adjacent
to the downtown Plano station.

Rail supporters in Houston salivate over the thought of dense
development along proposed lines inside Loop 610. They hope light rail
will help end the perception of Houston as one of the nation's ugliest,
most spread out, car-dependent, congested and polluted cities.

"Their success with the projects that have occurred along the transit stops
has been phenomenal," said Ed Wulfe, the developer leading the Houston
committee campaigning for more trains.

Critics dispute that light rail brings development, however.

"Those projects were planned long before the rail line," Stevens said.
"The reality is that if you are looking for results, a renovation or two is far
from the revitalization of a community."

But nearly every light rail passenger interviewed in Dallas advised
Houstonians to vote for the mass transit referendum.

Becky Zukosky of Sachse, standing in a packed Blue Line train as it
zipped along at 65 mph in a subway tunnel heading out of downtown, said
the light rail has helped relieve the traffic flow for those still driving cars.

"I've been to Houston many, many times, and they should have started
this years ago," she said. "They've come to the point now where they
have to do something, and mass transit like this would definitely solve a
lot of their problems."


[SIDEBAR]

DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT


·FY 2004 operating budget: $288 million

·Shortfall from original projection: $37 million

·Federal maintenance funds requested: $18 million

·Cuts to bus service: $10 million

·Bus routes deleted last week: 16

·Bus routes modified: 39

·Minutes between midday trains: Was 15; now 20

·Estimated riders lost due to last week's cuts: 3,000

·Last year's fare increase: Was $1; now $1.25



DART subsidies per passenger by mode:


·Light rail: $2.65
 ·Bus: $4.06
 ·Commuter rail: $6.23



This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2153916



=PTP=================================================

Houston Transportation Bulletin
October 7, 2003
_____________________________

The Metro Solutions plan to greatly improve transit in the Houston region
will come to a vote on November 4. To help increase understanding of the
proposal and of transit's place in the greater transportation picture, the
Gulf Coast institute will publish a series of educational bulletins. ...


Transit myths

"Transit doesn't reduce congestion" Fact: transit plays a significant role in
reducing congestion growth. The existing Houston transit system reduced
travel delay in 2001 by 19,795,000 hours(1).


Transit Facts

in the past six years, public transportation ridership in the US has grown
by more than 24 percent, faster than highway or air travel. The equivalent
of almost a million new trips on public transportation were added each day
in 2001(2).


Economic Benefits

Businesses realize a $15 million increase in sales for each $10 million in
transit operations spending, or a return 1.5 times investment over the long
term. Additionally, businesses realize a $17 million increase in sales for
each $10 million in transit capital investment, for a return of 1.7 times
investment(3).


Energy

For every mile traveled, public transportation uses about one half of the
fuel consumed by automobiles, and about a third of that used by sport
utility vehicles(4).


Existing Light Rail

in the first quarter of 2003, light rail ridership in Dallas was up 46.27
percent over the same period in 2002. Total transit ridership was up 5.4
percent over that same period(5).

Metro Solutions

The November 4 vote will fund the beginning of the 22-year Metro
Solutions plan. Metro estimates it will complete full bus system expansion
and 22 miles of rail during the first ten years. This vote will authorize the
sale of just $640,000,000 in bonds for this purpose. In 2009, voters will
return to the polls to authorize financing for the remaining portions of the
plan. No new taxes are proposed(6).

Metro Facts

Rail opponents often say that Metro only serves one percent of the trips in
the region. But the Metro service area only covers a small percent of the
region. It serves 4 percent of all the trips in the service area at morning
peak hour, and 26 percent of all trips to the Central Business District at
that time. That number is projected to rise to 43 percent by 2025(7).


Historical Trends

After World War II, transit ridership experienced a decline due to
inexpensive fuel and government policies favoring suburban development
and financing the interstate highway system. By 1972, ridership had
dropped to a low of 6.5 billion trips. Ridership rose gradually to 9.7 billion
trips in 2002. Reasons for the increase include a strong economy,
improved customer service, and higher levels of investment in public
transportation resulting from 1991 federal legislation and succeeding
funding bills(8).


"100 Percent Solution Plan"

Rail opponents say that, instead of the Metro plan, the Houston region
should adopt something called the "100 Percent Solution Plan," which is
being prepared by the Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC). But the
100 Percent Solution Plan is not a plan. It's more of a study, according to
H-GAC's transportation manager Alan Clark. Federal  law prohibits the
agency from planning and programming projects for which they have no
identified  funding. The 100 Percent Solution Plan currently includes
projects that have no identified revenue sources as well as those that do
have identified sources. For example, the 100 Percent Solution Plan says
the region needs to add 10,703 new lane-miles at a cost of $21 billion to
help reduce congestion. Currently, the agency has not identified to the
public funding for about half that amount(9).

Sources:

1. 2003 Urban Mobility Report, Exhibit A-6, published by the Texas
Transportation institute. September 2003. http://mobility.tamu.edu.
2. 2003 Public Transportation Fact Book, American Public Transportation
Association, page v.
3. Public Transportation and the Nation's Economy,  Cambridge



=PTP=============================================

[PTP NOTE:  While a local legislator's enthusiasm for rail transit for the
Austin area is welcome, some caveats and "reality checks" are in order
regarding the following article.

First, the most likely immediate candidate route for regional rail
("commuter" rail) is the Leander-Austin line, which is owned by Capital
Metro, the transit agency.  Bare-bones rail transit could be implemented
on this (assuming voter approval, or a waiver of state legislation) at
relatively low cost.  However, for such a service, ridership is projected in
the 2,000-4,000/day range, vs. approximately 32,000/day for the central
light rail transit (LRT) route proposed in 2000.  (Note that the 11,000/day
figure cited in the article corresponds to the entire 110-mile railroad
corridor between suburbs north of Austin and south to San Antonio)

The statement that the Leander-Austin route "runs next to the old Robert
Mueller Municipal Airport" is inaccurate.  The railway is approximately a
quarter mile (0.4 km) west of the periphery of the airport, separated by an
intervening neighborhood, business establishments, and a major arterial
(Airport Blvd.).

Second, the other two alignments suggested present major obstacles to
rail transit use which must be addressed and overcome if there is any
hope for implementing rail transit in these corridors.  The Union Pacific
Railroad (UPRR) right-of-way, through Austin's west side, is the UPRR's
north-south main line, and the principle railway route for NAFTA (North
American Free Trade Agreement) traffic, handling at least 20 trains a day,
as the article notes.  Much of this is single-tracked with constricted ROW
width, including a single-track bridge over the Colorado River.  Clearly,
use of this line for frequent regional passenger rail service faces serious
challenges, and the prospect of inducing the UPRR to "move" or
otherwise "stop" its freight operations is daunting.

The third route mentioned, "a section of rail line that the Texas
Department of Transportation owns ... east of I-35 along the planned
State Highway 130", apparently refers to the remains of the abandoned
Missouri-Kansas Texas (MKT, or "Katy") Railroad on the far east side of
the city, unused for nearly 3 decades.  The conversion of portions of this
route to transit use is a plausible possibility.  Another possibility is its
conversion to an alternate route, or bypass, for relocating the UPRR,
freeing up the UP's current alignment through the western portion of
central Austin.  However, some of the Katy ROW is no longer intact, and
southern extension of this line (e.g., as a bypass for the UPRR) faces the
need to bridge the Colorado River.  Adaptation of this route would require
substantial civil works and financial investment.

While the Leander-Austin line might be a project within reach, the
prospect of renovating all three of these proposed routes for regional rail
transit service within a budget of $100 million and a 3-year timeframe
invites considerable skepticism.]


http://austin.bizjournals.com/austin/stories/2003/10/06/story1.html

Austin Business Journal
October 6, 2003

EXCLUSIVE REPORTS

Local commuter rail on track

Rep. Krusee promotes system as cheaper alternative to light rail

Giselle Greenwood and Mary Alice Kaspar
Austin Business Journal Staff

Aiming to curb traffic congestion in Central Texas, a state lawmaker is
pushing for three commuter rail routes in the region at a projected cost of
less than $100 million.

One Central Texas businessman says the commuter rail system would
drive economic development to areas that typically have been overlooked.

Rep. Mike Krusee, R-Taylor, who is chairman of the House Transportation
Committee and an opponent of the long-discussed light rail system for
Austin, says: "Commuter rail is cheaper, faster and less disruptive to
create. We have the opportunity to do something at a fraction of the
price."

Under Krusee's plan, rail routes that would be converted for commuter
traffic are:

The Union Pacific Corp. freight rail line. It runs parallel to MoPac
Expressway between San Marcos and Taylor.

The Austin-to-Leander line owned by the Capital Metropolitan
Transportation Authority. It runs next to the old Robert Mueller Municipal
Airport.

A section of rail line that the Texas Department of Transportation owns. It
is east of I-35 along the planned State Highway 130.

Krusee says the commuter rail system could be completed in less than
three years and cost less than $100 million. Austin voters narrowly
defeated Cap Metro's referendum on light rail in November 2000. The
estimated price tag for the 20-mile initial phase of Austin's light rail system
was $919 million.

State legislation or an election would be required before Cap Metro could
put passenger traffic on any rail lines, Krusee says. That's because
previous legislation driven by Krusee requires Cap Metro to hold an
election before transporting people on fixed routes. Krusee says that law
was meant to ensure Cap Metro seeks voter approval for light rail.

Krusee says he will consider amending the law during the Texas
Legislature's 2005 session so Cap Metro could operate commuter rail
without voter approval.

The next step is to get Cap Metro, TxDOT and Union Pacific on board
with the plan. The biggest hurdle is stopping Union Pacific from using the
freight line.

"UP is cooperating," Krusee says. "They see the value in it."

Union Pacific spokesman Mark Davis says: "it's something we've been
working with state and various agencies over the years, and we're
studying their proposals."

The railroad has about 20 trains a day traveling between San Marcos and
Round Rock.

Part of the equation includes Amtrak, which is under contract agreement
with Union Pacific to put passenger trains on the railroad's line. Amtrak
would be involved with negotiations with the commuter rail group if it is
formed, Davis says.

Krusee's proposal calls for installing sound barriers in neighborhoods that
border MoPac, which is adjacent to the Union Pacific line.

Mike Weaver, principal of Austin transportation planning firm Prime
Strategies Inc., says Krusee's plan is reasonable.

"Right now, the most important thing is to convince UP to move," Weaver
says. "If UP moves, then it opens up a lot of opportunities."

Cap Metro's line would be the easiest to convert and sits near the Austin
Convention Center, an area that likely would generate a fair amount of
commuter rail traffic. Cap Metro spokesman Rick Lamie says the agency
supports commuter rail.

"Commuter rail is important to Capital Metro because it will be a vital part
of transportation for the region," Lamie says. "it'll cost less and give you
more."

TxDOT also seems to support Krusee's plan.

The state agency has drafted preliminary recommendations that call for
creation of an umbrella group to launch commuter rail in Austin. A draft
document from TxDOT states that having a centralized group --
comprising representatives of Cap Metro, TxDOT and the Austin-San
Antonio inter-Municipal Commuter Rail District -- coordinate commuter rail
plans will "facilitate a more efficient process, provide seamless
connectivity, prevent duplication of effort, and terminate the fragmentation
of authority."

The draft document from TxDOT also reinforces the idea of relocating
Union Pacific's freight rail lines.

Bob Tesch, chairman of the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority,
owns and operates the Oakmont Business Park in Cedar Park. He says
commuter rail would boost businesses in areas that have been given short
shrift.

"This is really a quality-of-life issue. It's also about businesses having
greater opportunities," Tesch says. "Commuter rail will not only increase
the standard of living but will also affect economic development."

"Commuter rail utilizes resources that are already in place," Tesch says.
"For a small amount of capital outlay, a large amount of mobility can
occur."

A 1999 study from TxDOT predicted a commuter rail corridor between the
Austin and San Antonio areas would carry nearly 11,000 passengers a
day in 2020. The study found a new 110-mile system between San
Antonio and Georgetown, a suburb 30 miles north of Austin, would cost
$250 million to $475 million.

But there's also an economic development cost associated with the
continually clogged traffic in the Austin area.

The region's transportation system was listed as a key stumbling block for
the area's growth in a recent report prepared by Atlanta-based Market
Street Services Inc.

Austin commuters spent 30 extra hours idling in traffic in 2001, wasting
travel time at a higher pace than their counterparts in other Texas cities,
according to an annual study released Sept. 30 by the Texas
Transportation institute at Texas A&M University.

Email GISELLE GREENWOOD at (ggreenwood@bizjournals.com). Email
MARY ALICE KASPAR at (makaspar@bizjournals.com).



=PTP===============================================

Boston Herald
Tuesday, October 7, 2003

Rear wheels fall off bus on Silver Line

by Thomas Caywood

An MBTA Silver Line bus loaded with passengers ground to an
unexpected halt on its belly yesterday morning when the rear dual wheels
on one side fell off.


''initial evidence indicates the wheel lug nuts loosened and caused the
lugs to fail,'' MBTA spokesman Joe Pesaturo said. ''We are in the
process now of determining why the wheel lug nuts loosened.''

None of the passengers was injured in the incident, which happened near
the intersection of Washington and West Dedham streets just before 7
a.m., he said.

The left rear side of the bus dragged on the street for about 10 feet before
the bus came to a stop.

T officials pulled all of the 60-foot Silver Line buses out of service and
inspected the lug nuts on each yesterday. Silver Line service continued
uninterrupted on 40-foot buses, Pesaturo said.



=PTP=============================================

Boston Globe
10/12/2003

Buzz on Washington Street drives T to changes

By Mac Daniel, Globe Staff

An uncomfortable vibration has been rumbling through portions of the
South End, a not-so-subtle shake that sometimes makes dinnerware
dance and gets on the nerves of even veteran urban dwellers.

The culprit is not local roadwork or errant takeoffs from Logan Airport, but
a hum coming from the MBTA's new, 60-foot-long accordion buses on the
year-old Silver Line. The low-floor buses that run on compressed natural
gas are creating a very physical buzz while making their North American
debut.

"it's just in your feet and through your body," said Jeffrey Gates, managing
partner at the new Union Bar and Grille in the Waltham-Union Park block
of Washington Street, on the route of the Silver Line.

Thus far, though, Gates said most of his patrons haven't noticed. "Along
Washington Street," he said, "it's just our little secret."

Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority officials and the city's Office
of Neighborhood Services have received only a handful of complaints, but
they were enough for the T to hire an acoustic analyst using sound
recorders and vibration-measuring accelerometers to help solve the
mystery.

"I have to go away weekends to get relief, because it's in my house and
it's in my studio," said artist and resident Jane Brayton. "It was even in a
restaurant where we went to eat the other night.

"There's just no escape," she said. "I wake up to it in the morning. I go to
bed with it at night. And there's nothing I can do about it. You can't go into
another room and shut the door."

Jeff Perk, a 41-year-old travel writer who lives in Jamaica Plain,
experienced a tremor from the buses during a recent dinner at Penang
Malaysian Cuisine on Washington Street near a Silver Line stop.

When one of the Silver Line's 60-footers idled nearby, Perk said, the
restaurant rattled.

"Metal pans in the kitchen, plates on some of the tables, even the front
windows, it seemed, all started clattering away as if the Jolly Green
Giant's clothes dryer was in its high-spin cycle right below the floor," he
wrote in an e-mail to the Globe. "The rumble really gets into your teeth,
too. All in all, a very unpleasant sensation."

initially, the source of this strange disturbance was a mystery. The new
40-foot buses that run the same route didn't create the same vibrations,
according to residents, who said the rattling is worse when a 60-foot bus
sits idle or accelerates from a dead stop.

Residents who live or work near bus stops have felt it. But when a 60-
footer passes quickly by, some South Enders said, they have felt nothing
but the gritty passing breeze.

"it's nothing major," said Kam Patel, who works at Sid's Smoke Shop at
the corner of East Berkeley and Washington streets near two adjacent
bus stops. The reverberations at that location should be at their worst, but
are not.

"It doesn't bother me," Patel said.

Some residents believe that roadwork done on Washington Street prior to
the Silver Line's debut is adding to the problem, while others wonder
whether the vibrations are caused by the engine's closer proximity to the
street on the low-floor buses.

MBTA officials have patiently sat in local living rooms, waiting silently for
any disturbance as the buses pass by. In the end, they were left
scratching their heads. Until last week.

The conclusion: the idle of the bus engine, a noisy bus muffler, and the
canyonlike architecture along Washington Street all appear to contribute
to the phenomenon, according to a report issued by the T's sound
analysts.

Each new bus, manufactured by Neoplan USA, is powered by a 6-
cylinder, 4-cycle engine that idles at 700 revolutions per minute, which
analysts found generated a tone that excites vibration in a few of the
South End's older buildings. Two homes were tested, though the analysts
said the results could apply elsewhere.

Two solutions were offered: redesign the mufflers or increase the bus
engine's idling speed, which would shift the exhaust noise to a higher
frequency with less potential to cause vibration and annoyance.

T spokesman Joe Pesaturo said the authority plans to work on both
suggestions, with all the costs borne by the manufacturer, not the MBTA.
The modifications are already under way, Pesaturo said, with the T
planning to test the new muffled mufflers and higher revving engines on
Washington Street next month.

At Penang, manager Chin Seng Toh said he had felt the vibrations, but
never gave them a second thought. Truck, car, or Silver Line bus, he said,
it's all part of the urban cacophony that rumbles close by his front door
every day.

"We are so near the street, you can't do anything about it," he said. "it's a
busy city. Be reasonable. It's a city."



=PTP===============================================

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/1012Mrail12.html

The Arizona Republic
Oct. 12, 2003

Light rail folks ready E. Valley for disruptions

Pre-construction meetings planned

Adam Klawonn

Light rail officials are gearing up for the start of preliminary construction by
trying to ensure that the rail's image remains spotless in the East Valley.

in the next few weeks, planners will:


• Hold open houses for businesses along the rail line to pitch the plans to
them. Included: business owners from other cities where rail has been
built. America West Airlines is flying the guests in for free, and Holiday inn
is putting them up, also for free. They'll do a three-day tour in Phoenix,
Tempe and Mesa starting Oct. 21.


• A community advisory board is being created for each of the five
segments of the 20.3-mile rail line in Phoenix, Tempe and Mesa. Officials
say it's a way for residents to hold the contractor accountable on things
such as construction signs and dust control.


• Results of a $148,000 market study commissioned for the rail corridor is
due out in about two weeks, said Mike James, a Valley Metro Rail
planner.

All will directly affect what occurs along the route in neighborhood
sentiment and redevelopment sites like the former Tri-City Mall near
Dobson Road and Main Street, the end of the line in Mesa.

"I think that's a smart way to go because if you are someone in the
vicinity, you've got a lot of questions," said Jos Anshell, chief executive of
Moses Anshell, a prominent creative marketing firm in Phoenix.

"I can't imagine they'd bring anybody in who would say bad things about
it," he added.

Mesa Vice Mayor Dennis Kavanaugh says it shows the rail's regional
governing board is allowing little room for a public relations slip-up.

"There should be no surprises to the public on this," he said. "The input
from residential and business communities has to be on the highest scale
possible. From other cities that we learned from, you can't have enough."

Light rail staff members, for example, met with Mesa school officials and
then neighborhood Block Watch captains two weeks before their
publicized Oct. 8 open house at Webster Elementary, effectively allowing
them to polish their Tri-City Mall presentation.

"This shows the lengths we are willing to go to get the public involved,"
said Daina Mann, a Valley Metro Rail spokeswoman.

She says the advisory groups can control 7 percent of the contractor's
revenue, a lot of coin on multimillion-dollar contracts. Forming the group is
a tactic rail officials picked up from a staff member who came over from
Houston, where accountability was an issue, Mann said.

"it's a huge incentive for them to do what makes the community happy,"
she said.

Grant Sperry, owner of a Salt Lake City internet firm who is one of the
businessmen coming to the Valley later this month for the rail, said his
experience was positive.

"It was dusty, but it's been great."

He said he'll talk about dust issues after he tried to get light rail insurers to
cover a dust-encrusted $600 bi-metric lock and failed.

The others who have accepted are a nail salon owner from Portland and
the owner of a drive-through burger joint in Salt Lake City.








PTP Digest 2003/10/12-A = CONTENTS

* Houston ed: LRT supported even by opponents' statistics
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 11, 2003

* Houston op-ed: 'Rail foes' funny math a costly joke'
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 11, 2003

* Houston letters: Pro & con on rail plan
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 10, 2003

* Seattle: Builder agrees to extend LRT bid deadline
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Saturday, October 11, 2003

* San Jose: Benefit assessment districts near LRT stations OKd
   San Jose Mercury News Sat, Oct. 11, 2003

* Phoenix suburb's chamber head:  'Lawmakers must aid light rail'
   Arizona Republic Oct. 11, 2003

* So NJ: Light DMU line will slow down through small towns
   Philadelphia inquirer Fri, Oct. 10, 2003

* Dallas: Massive program to upgrade rail crossing safety
   Dallas Morning News Saturday, October 11, 2003



=PTP================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 11, 2003

Editorial

ALTERNATE ROUTE

Even its opponents' statistics argue for light rail

in last summer's edition of Cite magazine, a Houston review of
architecture and design, professional engineer Christof Spieler observes
that light rail is not an experiment in this country. It is a 22-year-old, 22-city
success story. Far from regretting a mistake, residents in all but one of
those cities have clamored for and received expansions.

Houstonians won't be able to experience light rail here until January, but
the preponderance of the evidence argues that multimodal mass transit,
including light rail, is essential to Houstonians' future mobility. Strangely
enough, some of the most convincing evidence is offered by Michael S.
Stevens, a principal opponent of light rail in Houston.

in a Powerpoint presentation to the Houston business community and the
Chronicle, Stevens noted that between 1990 and 2000, the Houston area
was able to increase its lane miles by 11 percent. At the same time, the
population grew by 24 percent and motorists collectively increased the
number of miles they drove by 43 percent. Result: increased congestion.
In  2000, Houston area motorists took 41 minutes to make each trip that
would have taken 30 minutes without congestion.

These figures are drawn from a decade in which Metro gave away 25
percent of its sales tax revenues for roadwork and spent relatively little on
planning and developing light rail. The irrefutable conclusion to be drawn
from this data is that a policy of spending every nickel on highways and
buses will result in more and more congestion, just as it has in the past.

Light-rail opponents advertise that light rail costs as much as it would to
give every new transit rider a Ferrari sports car. But transit serves
Houstonians who cannot afford to own, operate, insure and replace the
most affordable car -- about $9,000 per year per household. Furthermore,
rail transit serves current riders as well as new riders, reducing the per-
rider cost to something closer to a Ford.

Rail opponents state that Metro's proposed long-range mobility plan on
the November ballot won't reduce congestion. But spending more and
more on roads hasn't reduced congestion, either.

At least Metro's plan won't destroy as many acres of homes and
businesses as endless freeway expansion will, and failure to adopt
Metro's plan will definitely increase congestion. For every four Metro
riders, three cars are taken off the road.

Metro opponents dwell on the statistic that transit accounts for only 3.2
percent of the work trips in the eight-county Houston region. But transit is
only offered in part of one county in that region. Metro buses account for
42 percent of the all-important rush-hour work trips in the central business
district, 32 percent in the Texas Medical Center and 9 percent in its entire
service area. Even if Metro's market share grows slowly, the number of
transit riders will explode along with the population, reducing the number
of vehicles on the road proportionately.

in insisting that Metro spend no money on expanding light rail, critics
argue, in effect, that transit service should never be faster or smoother
than it is now. In the final analysis, opponents object to any transit agency
that squanders its resources on transit patrons when it could be catering
to single motorists on clogged freeways and thoroughfares.

This is an appealing argument to some area residents who don't ride
transit and care nothing about those who do. The element of selfishness
this argument unavoidably entails may be the reason contributors to the
anti-rail Texans for True Mobility do not wish their names made public.

Some rail opponents say they would support a better rail plan, but they
have no rail plan to offer and never will. If they're so knowledgeable about
rail corridors, why didn't they produce a blueprint when Metro was asking
the public for advice?

As Houstonians will discover in January, light-rail lines offer a clean,
nonpolluting, relatively quiet, smooth-riding alternative to cars and buses
on congested, potholed roadways. The stately, 25 mph progress of a light-
rail car might seem slow, but it will seem swift when measured against
those caught in the increased highway congestion that will inevitably
come, with or without rail.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/2150272



=PTP==============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 11, 2003

Viewpoints

Rail foes' funny math a costly joke

By HANK DITTMAR

Wtih Houston facing a referendum on investment in transit next month,
voters are sure to be besieged with a blizzard of statistics from both sides.
It is worth taking a closer look at the numbers.

Opponents of transit investment are fond of citing the National Household
Travel Survey to argue that public transit accounts for less than 2 percent
of all trips. In fact, the 2 percent figure dramatically understates transit
usage in metropolitan areas and overstates auto use. If one looks further,
one learns that transit plays a much bigger role, and that transit
investment can provide the armature for economic development and
growth.

The 2 percent figure comes from a national survey which also discloses
that passenger transportation is only available to about one-half of all
Americans. In areas where transit is reasonably available, for instance, in
the city of Los Angeles, the share of transit trips is much higher than 2
percent, about 12 percent. Another survey by the Federal Transit
Administration found that for every daily user of transit there are three
more users on a monthly basis.

The NHTS survey counts as a separate trip every stop that a driver
makes. If, for instance, one stops on the way to work to drop the kids at
preschool, then stops to get a cup of coffee, that's counted as two trips.
When one gets back in the car with one's latte and continues to work, that
makes three trips out of one journey to work. If, on the way home from
work, the commuter stops to pick up milk and then stops down the block
to get the dry cleaning, the statisticians count it as three more trips. They
call this way of inflating automobile use "trip-chaining," and they use it to
argue that transit use is insignificant.

in fact, trip chaining, which is merely the sensible practice of
accomplishing multiple errands with one trip, accounts for much of the
supposed growth in travel, when measured in terms of trips. It also
accounts for the claimed trend toward work trips being a smaller share of
travel, another shibboleth used to argue that transit is irrelevant. Work
trips are counted as the trip from home to work, and if the commuter stops
off for coffee, dry-cleaning, groceries or pizza on the way home, then the
trip from home to work no longer exists in the planner's statistics.

Of course, this is silly, as everyone knows that Americans are working
more than ever and that morning and evening commutes grow worse
each year. In fact, where, speedy and convenient transit options are
available for the journey to work, transit competes well. In the
Washington, D.C., region, for example, 37 percent of peak hour trips into
the metropolitan core are carried by public transit.

The fact that federally funded surveys systematically exaggerate auto use
is compounded by the fact that they also undercount other ways of getting
around, partly by focusing on the usual means of getting to work and
ignoring all other trips. People who drive three days a week and ride
transit two days a week are counted as drivers. Transit users often walk to
the bus stop or rail station, and that walk to the stop is often used for
errands. But most government travel surveys don't count the walk to
transit as a trip, and that undercounts walking, obscuring the fact that
good transit choices also encourage walking.

if accomplishing personal errands is such an important part of people's
lives, shouldn't we try to make those errands easy to accomplish for
transit riders, too? There is an increasing trend in this direction, with
transit agencies and city officials putting rider-serving amenities close to
transit stops. Putting groceries, dry cleaners, coffee shops and
restaurants in walkable neighborhoods allows transit "trip-chaining" too,
increasing convenience. This type of transit-oriented development is
springing up all over, in revitalizing urban neighborhoods in Chicago and
Washington and around newer systems in San Jose, Calif., Dallas and
Salt Lake City.

A University of North Texas study found that Dallas' DART light-rail
system had generated more than $800 million in development, while
Portland, Ore.'s MAX light-rail line was found to have generated $2.4
billion in economic development. Arlington County, Va., which focuses
growth around its MetroRail stations, generates more than one-third of its
tax revenues from the 7 percent of the county's land area within walking
distance of the stations, and that helps Arlington have the lowest tax rate
of any northern Virginia county.

Transit ridership grows as development clusters around transit, and this
gives more and more people the chance to avoid congestion by using
transit. Studies consistently show that ridership grows as the number of
people living in walking distance of the station goes up. With almost half
of American households moving every five years, according to census
estimates, and with population demographics increasingly favoring more
compact neighborhoods due to the aging baby boomers, the preference
of "echo-boomers" for urban living and the impact of immigration, building
walkable, convenient neighborhoods close to transit is increasingly viable.

The automobile will likely be the dominant way of getting around for a long
time, but everybody benefits from viable options being available, even
drivers. In fact, given the recent defeat of transportation funding proposals
at the ballot box in Virginia and Missouri, even the road lobby ought to
think about the impact these kinds of spurious statistics have in
undermining the public's confidence in transportation investments.

it's time to stop manipulating the numbers in ways that undervalue
alternatives, and time to start looking at ways to increase the convenience
and flexibility of those alternatives in ways that respond to our increasingly
busy and complex lives. That's where integrating transit and communities
comes in.


Dittmar is president and chief executive officer of Reconnecting America,
a national nonprofit organization which seeks to improve the relationship
between transportation, communities and the economy.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2150380



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 10, 2003

VIEWPOINTS

Eyeing anti-rail ads and dreaming of high-speed trains

Unfair comparisons made

I was pleased the Chronicle investigated the accuracy of the figures used
in the anti-rail advertising alleging that the Metropolitan Transit Authority
could buy an expensive sports car for every new rail rider for the cost of
the proposed rail system. But the analysis did not present a complete
picture. Most of the rail system's assets will last for 30 years or more.
Used in a daily commute, how long would one new sports car last? We'd
need four or five new sports cars for each new rail rider over that 30-year
period.

The costs included operating and maintenance costs for rail, too. Those
sports cars won't be operated for free.

What about interest expense, maintenance, insurance, licenses and
gasoline costs (just to name a few)? The rail costs included track and, in
some cases, rights-of-way costs. Where are we going to drive all those
fancy sports cars?

Our highways are full. So we'll have to add in costs for new roads and
highway capacity to really be fair.

I could go on and on, adding the cost of additional parking lots, air
pollution and other intangibles to the discussion. These commercials
present a biased "apples to oranges" comparison.

Voters must beware of those who play fast and loose with the facts.

Nancy Edmonson, Shoreacres


Rider capacity in rail vs. bus

Since the Chronicle is now checking out the advertisements on the
Metropolitan Transit Authority's Solutions Plan, I went back to review a
promotional flyer distributed by Metro several months ago.

Metro showed a graph comparing different options for moving 200 people
during rush hour, and implied that rail would reduce traffic congestion. It
compared:

· The maximum standing-room capacity of a rail vehicle (200).

· What appears to be the average seated capacity of a Metro fleet bus
(47).

· The average seated capacity of a van (12).

· The average occupancy in an automobile (1.2).

Most of Metro's rail passengers will be traveling less than a mile between
the new Texas Medical Center peripheral parking lot on Greenbriar into
the TMC. Standing up is an option for these passengers, but standing for
a 20-minute ride downtown would be the "commute from hell," and
doesn't sound like the comfortable and attractive service that Metro has
been promising.

A Metro rail vehicle actually takes up more space than buses of the same
useful capacity, which increases rather than decreases traffic congestion.

Paul R. Johnson, Houston


Disregard smear campaign

The Texans for True Mobility seem to be running a covert and unethical,
yet apparently legal, smear campaign against the rail referendum. [This
group's] refusal to "pull the covers back" and reveal the source of its
funding reeks of slimy, self-serving, special-interest politics. Any public
discussion or campaign where the parties will not reveal donors should
clearly indicate that they have a hidden agenda. The public interests this
group is attempting to sway will not be the true beneficiaries of its
campaign.

Houston's "rail or not to rail" argument has been active for decades. Our
Sun Belt sprawl makes the full implementation of a rail system to serve all
of the region a very difficult, costly and time-consuming project.

However, if a rail system is not implemented, the mere existence of
Houston as we know it [will be] in limbo. Future generations, if not the
current one, will choke themselves.

Houston cannot afford to lose any more drainage capacity [by] the pouring
of thousands of miles of additional concrete.

As a parent of young children, I question the wisdom of raising another
generation of Houstonians in a city possessing the potential for serious
health consequences. I hope that Houstonians will take note of the
behavior and inaction of the TTM when they make their educated decision
on the future of the city.

Kevin McCarthy, Houston


Sell rail to Houston's Anglos

it's time for us to have rail, but we need to overcome some barriers that
don't get addressed. As a 38-year-old native Houstonian, I always thought
of public transportation as something you needed when you didn't have a
car. The majority of bus ridership is [made up of] blacks and Hispanics
who already know the benefits of the public transportation system.

Rail is a need that educated persons with vision know we must have in
Houston. Mobility to the dense suburbs of Katy, Rosenberg and The
Woodlands -- with promises to expand -- has to be sold to Anglo
Houstonians.

How many cars can fit on the Katy Freeway? How much concrete will we
pour?

Beltway 8 was a great idea, but now the west side of Beltway 8 (after only
a few years) is completely maxed out. And our population is projected to
increase to what?

Taking cars off the streets should be a top priority, which we have heard
for years. We need to get Anglo Houston on the rail ticket. It is simple
math. There will be too many cars in the near future to continue this way
of life. The wider the freeway, the wider the traffic jams.

Rail will happen sooner or later. But how much are we going to suffer in
the meantime? Rail plans should be expanded, not watered down.

Richard Klase Jr., Houston


Riding on his dream train

How long are we Americans going to talk about solutions to our traffic
problems? When are we going to get high-speed rail connecting Houston,
San Antonio and Dallas-Fort Worth? Not chug-chug car/trains, but single-
car, 100-passenger trains traveling 150 miles an hour or faster, leaving
several times a day.

They would get us there faster than planes, considering time getting to
airports, waiting time, getting back into the cities from airports, etc. The
best part is that they would be nonpolluting and put us into the heart of
our destinations. They would be electric-driven, using nonpolluting energy
from nuclear power plants which we have yet to build (and should be
doing so).

We could put so many people to work doing these things that
unemployment would be zilch. Our continued dependence on fossil fuels
will give us a rude awaking some day soon.

This train may be a dream, perhaps, but I still have that right and look
forward to riding my dream train.

Bill Groff, Orange



http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2147993



=PTP===========================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/143521_kiewit11.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Saturday, October 11, 2003

Kiewit agrees to extend light rail bid deadline

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER STAFF AND NEWS SERVICES

Kiewit Pacific Co., the contractor that submitted a bid on the initial part of
Seattle's light rail line that was 15 percent below engineers' estimates,
agreed yesterday to extend its guarantee of the bid price for another two
weeks.

The bid, which was submitted June 12, was set to expire yesterday.
Sound Transit had requested the bid extension in hopes a $500 million
federal grant hung up in Congress could be freed, allowing construction
on the 14-mile line to begin.

it's unknown whether the grant agreement will be approved within two
weeks. If the bid expires, Sound Transit must put the work out for bid
again, which could take up to three months and possibly result in a higher
price and delay in completion of the line.



=PTP================================================

San Jose Mercury News
Sat, Oct. 11, 2003

Davis gives VTA green light to charge a fee to owners of properties near
stations

By Gary Richards

Gov. Gray Davis signed legislation Friday giving the Valley Transportation
Authority the right to assess fees on property owners within a half-mile of
a light rail or BART station.

With the concurrence of property owners and the city where a stop is
located, the VTA can create a benefit assessment district. Money raised
would pay for the cost of building, maintaining and operating a station.

A majority of property owners would need to support a proposal to charge
fees. Their votes would be weighted according to the value of their
property. Transit districts across the country often charge fees; the
building of a station often raises the value of property adjacent to a stop.

The VTA has not determined how much money could be raised by such
fees. The agency, which depends on volatile sales-tax revenues to cover
80 percent of its operating budget, wants to find more stable forms of
income.



=PTP=================================================

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/eastvalleyopinions/articles/1011
miller1011.html

Arizona Republic
Oct. 11, 2003

Lawmakers must aid light rail

Mary Ann Miller is president and CEO of the Tempe Chamber of
Commerce. The views expressed are those of the author.


The recent gasoline pipeline rupture in Tucson that sent prices soaring as
much as $4 a gallon in some stations and hour-long waits in line for fuel
underscores just how dependent on auto transportation are Arizona and,
particularly, metropolitan Phoenix.

Yet, an alternative, the Central Phoenix/East Valley Light Rail Transit
Project that would provide relief for our auto-reliant state, surprisingly is
not speeding through the approval process.

Rep. Ed Pastor, who serves on the Transportation Appropriations
Committee, and Rep. J.D. Hayworth have been crucial allies in securing
funding. Their support helped persuade the full House to approve fiscal
year 2004 transportation funding that includes $12 million for the light rail
project.

But now the measure moves to the Senate, where John McCain's position
has been decidedly lukewarm. Indeed, McCain's recent pledge to filibuster
any transportation projects that don't return a dollar in funding for every
dollar Arizona sends to Washington, may, in fact, do more harm than
good, despite whatever good intentions he may have for his home state.

Arizona, in fact, receives only 87 cents in transportation funding for every
gas-tax dollar sent to Washington, but we should not sacrifice progress on
the light rail project to hold it hostage to the larger principle.

The truth is that metropolitan Phoenix needs light rail. The August pipeline
rupture that frustrated drivers and prompted many of them to cope with
unfamiliar bus routes simply emphasized the extent of that need.

Voters in Phoenix, Tempe and Mesa long ago demonstrated their support
for the project by agreeing to tax themselves to pay for a full 50 percent of
project costs. In addition, 75 percent of the business community supports
the light rail project, according to a poll by O'Neil & Associates. An Urban
Land institute study says the light rail route suits perfectly the
demographic of those who would ride and is a proactive step to relieve
congestion expected by future population growth in the Valley of the Sun.

This high estimation of the light rail project is not restricted to Arizonans.
The project is one of only two rail projects in the country to receive the
federal government's "highly recommended" designation. Plus, the light
rail project has received approval of final design and of its environmental
impact report.

"Previously, McCain withheld support to see if we met certain
requirements and was taking a wait-and-see attitude," said Daina Mann,
communications manager for Valley Metro Rail. "But now we're at the
point that there's no more to see. We have met every test and every task.

"We're at the point where he needs to step up to the plate and start
lobbying and advocating to preserve that funding in the Senate and
through the conference committee."

in years past, the House typically awarded money to the light rail project,
the Senate gave zero and the difference was worked out in a conference
committee. But with the precarious state this year of the federal budget
and all the demands on money, support will be needed throughout the
entire process. That's why, more than ever, we need transportation
advocates in the Senate to stand up for the light rail project.

We urge our congressional delegation to get on board light rail. The $1.1
billion, 20.3-mile project will improve the Valley's quality of life. It will also
boost development along Tempe's Apache Corridor and the entire route,
bring in new tax revenues from commercial development, spur
rehabilitation of existing buildings and new construction, and provide a
transportation alternative to our increasingly choked freeways and streets.
For all these reasons, the Tempe Chamber of Commerce has long
supported the project and believes light rail has demonstrated that it
deserves full and committed backing from all our representatives.



=PTP================================================

[PTP NOTE:  The Southern New Jersey Light Rail Line is a diesel-electric-
propelled light regional rail line which does not conform to the definition of
light rail transit (LRT) specified by the Transportation Research Board.
PTP does not regard this system as LRT, but as light regional rail, often
called light DMU.  it could ultrimately prove to be a precursor to LRT in
this corridor, although station platform heights are higher than the
standard (14-in) for lowfloor LRT, and other infrastructure modifications
might be necessary.]

Philadelphia inquirer
Posted on Fri, Oct. 10, 2003


Light-Rail Speed Limits


NJ Transit says a full 34-mile trip on the Southern New Jersey Light Rail
Line between Camden and Trenton will take just more than an hour. No
start date for the line has been announced. The train, which will reach a
top speed of 60 m.p.h., will slow as it passes through communities. Here
is how fast it will go at major crossings:

Trenton: South Broad Street, 20 m.p.h. northbound, 17 m.p.h.
southbound. Lalor Street, 35 m.p.h. both directions.

Bordentown City: Farnsworth Avenue, 25 m.p.h. northbound, 50 m.p.h.
southbound.

Florence: Hornberger Avenue, 30 m.p.h. northbound, 17 m.p.h.
southbound. Delaware Avenue, 37 m.p.h. northbound, 45 m.p.h.
southbound.

Northern Burlington Township: Dulty's Lane, 45 m.p.h. both directions.
Neck Road, 45 m.p.h. both directions.

Burlington City: Jones Street, 40 m.p.h. northbound, 55 m.p.h.
southbound. The speed will be 25 m.p.h. through most of the rest of the
city, with the exception of 50 m.p.h. northbound at Commerce Square.

Southern Burlington Township: Devlin Avenue, 50 m.p.h. northbound, 40
m.p.h. southbound. Park Avenue and Woodlane Road, 45 m.p.h. both
directions.

Beverly/Edgewater Park: Cooper Street, 45 m.p.h. northbound, 30 m.p.h.
southbound. Broad Street, 45 m.p.h. northbound, 43 m.p.h. southbound.
Manor Road, 40 m.p.h. northbound, 47 m.p.h. southbound. Perkins Lane,
45 m.p.h. both directions.

Delanco: Cooper Street, 27 m.p.h. northbound, 45 m.p.h. southbound.

Riverside: Pavilion Avenue, 35 m.p.h. northbound, 20 m.p.h. southbound.
Fairview Street, 40 m.p.h. northbound, 35 southbound. Chester Avenue,
45 m.p.h. both directions.

Delran: Main Street, 45 m.p.h. both directions.

Cinnaminson: Taylors Lane, 45 m.p.h. both directions. Union Landing
Road, 35 m.p.h. northbound, 45 m.p.h. southbound. North Read Avenue,
35 m.p.h. both directions.

Riverton: Cedar Avenue, 20 m.p.h. northbound, 35 m.p.h. southbound.
Main Street, 25 m.p.h. northbound, 17 m.p.h. southbound. Elm Street, 25
m.p.h. both directions.

Palmyra: Morgan Avenue, 22 m.p.h. northbound, 25 m.p.h. southbound.
Cinnaminson Avenue, 30 m.p.h. northbound, 17 m.p.h. southbound.
Chestnut Street, 30 m.p.h. both directions. Park Avenue, 30 m.p.h. both
directions. Market Street, 30 m.p.h. both directions.

Pennsauken: Griffith Morgan Lane, 45 m.p.h. both directions. Derousse
Avenue, 40 m.p.h. northbound, 50 m.p.h. southbound. Cove Road, 45
m.p.h. both directions.

Camden: NJ Transit has not set specific speed limits for Camden, but said
the train would go only as fast as local traffic, usually about 25 m.p.h.



=PTP==================================================

http://www.dallasnews.com/localnews/columnists/thartzel/stories/101203d
nmetroadrunner.70413.html

Dallas Morning News
Saturday, October 11, 2003

Engineering a solution at crossings

By TONY HARTZEL / The Dallas Morning News

Motorists and trains cross paths in more than 2,000 locations in North
Texas.

With a little effort – and $9.4 million – some of those could be made safer
starting in about a year.

This spring, the North Central Texas Council of Governments made a list
of 150 dangerous crossings or crossings that need improvement. The list
grew to almost 500 after the regional planning agency asked for more
suggestions from officials in nine counties.

The need for safer crossings is expected to rise as the region's traffic
congestion grows.

in 2002, the Federal Railroad Administration recorded 35 train-vehicle
crashes in Dallas, Tarrant, Collin and Denton counties. Those crashes
resulted in five deaths and eight injuries. The previous year, the same
area had 39 crashes with six fatalities and 11 injuries.

Texas ranked first in the nation, with 325 collisions in 2002. Indiana was
second, with 175 crashes.

Local officials are lining up for federal grants to offset the sometimes
hundreds of thousands of dollars needed to make crossings safer. That
could be smoothing rough crossings to adding gates or median barriers to
prevent motorists from going around crossing arms.

"Nothing is out of the question," said Rachel Harshman, a transportation
planner for the council of governments who is overseeing the project
requests. "it's a variety of applications, and it's pretty much anybody's
game."

The deadline for applications is Oct. 24. Businesses with an interest in
improving certain crossings also can apply for the federal funds, which will
pay for 80 percent of a project's cost.

Regional planners like Ms. Harshman will grade each funding request on
criteria including the number of trains that use the tracks, the number of
cars that use the crossing and other site-specific benefits like emergency
vehicle access or frequent blockage by stopped trains.

Dallas Area Rapid Transit will seek funds for up to four crossings – two on
the commuter rail line it operates with the Fort Worth Transportation
Authority, and one or two on freight rail lines it owns.

"They're all safe crossings, assuming people follow the rules," said Kathy
Waters, DART's vice president for commuter rail. "What we're looking at
doing is improving safety."

With a pair of crossing gates costing at least $120,000, can add up
quickly, Ms. Harshman said.

While safety is the most important issue, some cities are expected to ask
for funds to establish "quiet zones." Federal rail authorities are
considering ways to allow trains to pass through an intersection without
having to blow their whistles.

While no regulations have been passed yet, it is expected that those rules
would require cities to add safety equipment at intersections. That could
include warning systems at crossings or a median barrier or crossing arms
on both sides of the railroad tracks. The arms or barrier would prevent
vehicles from going around gates.

Tony Hartzel can be reached at thartzel@dallasnews.com and at P.O.
Box 655237, Dallas, TX 75265.







PTP Digest 2003/10/11-A = CONTENTS

* D-FW: Regional panel eyes airport rail links
   Ft. Worth Star-Telegram Fri, Oct. 10, 2003

* Denver: More on Union Station intermodal plan
   Rocky Mountain News October 10, 2003

* Houston: Paper probes anti-rail money sources
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 10, 2003

* Vegas: Buses set to 'function like a light-rail commuter system'
   LAS VEGAS SUN October 10, 2003

* Virginia Beach: LRT gets new attention
   Norfolk Virginian-Pilot October 7, 2003

* Portland: Options pondered for new downtown LRT line
   Portland Oregonian 10/10/03

* Phoenix suburb seeks input on LRT station
   Arizona Republic Oct. 8, 2003

* NJ: State adds 6 more 'Transit Villages'
   Associated Press 10/10/2003

* Ca: Arnold's Florida auditor may axe high-speed rail
   San Jose Mercury News October 10, 2003



=PTP===============================================

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/local/states/texas/arlington/6980917.htm

Ft. Worth Star-Telegram
Fri, Oct. 10, 2003

Panel pitches airports' rail links

By Bryon Okada
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

ARLINGTON - Marking a major shift in the way the Metroplex moves,
light-rail links between Dallas/Fort Worth Airport and Love Field will
accompany the construction of lanes -- possibly tollways -- on Airport
Freeway.

The Regional Transportation Council will seek $100 million in state
mobility funds to create links between D/FW and Love Field, and to other
convention and recreation stops beyond.

The links could create a "wayport" configuration in Dallas where a
passenger could land at one airport and connect to a flight at the other
airport via a single rail connection.

"We need to do anything we can do today to have a seamless connection
for passengers at the airport going to their hotels," said Pedro Aguirre, a
member of the D/FW Airport Board and the RTC. "It seems to me we
don't have an option but to do this."

The proposals are part of a larger package of projects being
recommended to the state as the area's top priorities by the Regional
Transportation Council.

To advance the rail concept, the RTC is moving forward with buying a
two-mile section of the Union Pacific rail line in downtown Fort Worth near
the intermodal Transportation Center station. The purchase, the cost of
which was not released, would make future commuter service possible on
the Cotton Belt rail line from Fort Worth through Northeast Tarrant County
to D/FW Airport, and perhaps to Collin County.

Dallas Area Rapid Transit is seeking $775 million in federal grant money
to build light-rail connections. If the pieces fall in place, the concentration
on airport-related rail could mean a vast expansion of service by the end
of the decade, officials said.

D/FW officials, who have been working for months with the North Central
Texas Council of Governments, DART and the Fort Worth Transportation
Authority on airport-rail connections, praised the series of moves
Thursday afternoon.

"We're very pleased that we're making some progress, and we stand
ready to accommodate transit when off-airport systems can deliver the
transportation," D/FW Chief Executive Officer Jeff Fegan said.

All of this fits into the RTC's more general goal of promoting a regional
transit system to accommodate the 8.4 million people expected to live in
the Metroplex in 2030.

The RTC also earmarked more than $100 million in federal highway
money for toll lanes on Airport Freeway, interstate 635 and the future
Southwest Parkway.

The airport rail and toll-road projects are deemed by the RTC to be the
most crucial projects for the area. In selecting those projects, the RTC
acts on the state's desire to delegate more power to the regions, but it
also means that the RTC, not the state, is responsible for deciding the
projects' importance.

"The RTC's action today is not just the commitment of the funds, but to tell
the Texas Transportation Commission that we will take the heat if these
are not the highest priority projects," said Michael Morris, transportation
director for the council of governments, which acts as staff for the RTC.

Some critics argue that state mobility funds should not be sought for
nonhighway uses, but rail options are allowed, Morris said.

The RTC's recommendation to the state is actually a couple of weeks late.
Staff members sent a draft letter to the Texas Department of
Transportation on Sept. 30 as a placeholder for the letter approved
Thursday.

Member Mark Burroughs insisted that the RTC reiterate its stance that the
council does not support the conversion of existing free main lanes on
highways like Airport Freeway to toll lanes, a point of some controversy
earlier this year.

The RTC's regional transit priorities

Rail transit

• Dallas/Fort Worth Airport. Pursue $60 million in state mobility funds to
link airport terminals to the Cotton Belt line.

• Love Field Connection. Increase federal air-quality money earmarked
from $6.9 million to $20 million. Pursue $40 million in additional state
mobility funds.

• Cotton Belt Corridor. Purchase a two-mile section of Union Pacific Rail in
downtown Fort Worth, allowing future commuter rail between Fort Worth
and Dallas/Fort Worth Airport. Cost not disclosed.

Highways

• Texas 121/183 Airport Freeway from Northeast Loop 820 to Texas 161.
Reconstruct and widen roads, add main lanes and managed lanes --
which could include toll lanes -- $22 million.

• Texas 121 Southwest Parkway from interstate 30 to Altavista Boulevard.
Construct a toll facility, $29.5 million.

• interstate 635 from interstate 35E to U.S. 75. Construct managed
facilities and interchange, $50 million. Dallas Area Rapid Transit and
Dallas are also allocating funds.

Park-and-ride

• Southwest Park-N-Ride (Sycamore School Road and Camelot Road),
200 spaces.

• Far West Park-N-Ride (Parker County-Tarrant County), 200 spaces.

Air quality

• Regional programs.

High-occupancy vehicle facilities (to be done by 2007)

• interstate 30 from Grand Prairie to downtown Dallas.

• interstate 30 from Jim Miller Road to interstate 635.

• interstate 635 from Luna Road to Texas 161.

• interstate 635 from U.S. 75 to interstate 30.

Alternative fuel (to be done by 2007)

• Thirty-two compressed natural gas fuel systems for Fort Worth
Transportation Authority buses.

intelligent transportation (to be done by 2007)

• Real-time system monitoring and traffic management with closed-circuit
TV and dynamic message signs.

• Regional communication system.

• interstate 35, NAFTA corridor technology, including sensor stations,
closed-circuit TV, dynamic message signs and weather/ice prediction
stations.

intersections, traffic signals (to be done by 2007)

• interstate 30/University Drive pavement.

• Traffic signal sequencing at 300 intersections.

• improve 175 intersections and 485 signals in Dallas County (program is
47 percent complete).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryon Okada, (817) 685-3853 okada@star-telegram.com




=PTP===============================================

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_2336772,00.html

Rocky Mountain News
October 10, 2003

Union Station proposal would make it hub, bub

$560 million would turn train depot into transportation center

By Mike Patty, Rocky Mountain News

Consultants on Thursday unveiled their vision for transforming Denver's
Union Station into a regional transportation hub for the next 50 to 100
years.

The $560 million proposal calls for three major transportation components
- light rail, regional and express buses, and passenger rail - to go
underground.

Pedestrians, taxis, shuttles and automobiles would be at street level.
Commercial buses would enter on an elevated level.

Also planned are a $24 million renovation of the historic Union Station,
retail and office development, and parking and public areas.

The design is flexible enough to meet future demand and a variety of
funding schemes, said Gwen Anderson, Union Station project manager
for Denver.

"This could all be built in the next 12 years, or it could take 40 years," she
said.

"If FasTracks is approved, it would provide funds for the transit
components of the Union Station plan. But if FasTracks doesn't happen,
we would have to find other funding mechanisms."

FasTracks is a proposed Regional Transportation District sales-tax
increase expected to go before voters next year that would provide $4.2
billion for the expansion of the district's rail and bus systems.

John Valsecchi, project manager for Parsons Brinkerhoff, one of the
consulting firms, said locating major fixed-transportation modes
underground would create more flexibility at street level.

in addition, the underground-rail element would make Union Station a
"through station" rather than a "stub station," where trains pull in and back
out on the same tracks.

The 18-month, $5.3 million-dollar study was paid for by RTD, the city and
county of Denver, the Colorado Department of Transportation and the
Denver Regional Council of Governments.

A total of 44 alternative designs, including nine submitted by the public,
were looked at before the recommended plan was chosen.

it will now undergo a federal environmental analysis and a draft master
plan will be made public later this year.

Rezoning the site to transit-mixed use and a designation as a Denver
landmark is expected to go before the City Council next spring.

The final step would be approval by the Federal Transit Administration,
which is scheduled for December 2004.

Construction could begin as early as 2005.

"If FasTracks is approved, it will happen more quickly," said Eric
Anderson, project manager for Civitas, another consulting firm. "But it will
eventually happen for the region because it has to happen."



=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 10, 2003


Chronicle seeking list of anti-rail contributors

By ALAN BERNSTEIN


The Houston Chronicle asked the Harris County district attorney on Friday
to investigate whether a group opposing the proposed expansion of the
Metro rail system is breaking the law by refusing to publicly disclose
contributors to its campaign.

District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal said he would consider the request.

Texans for True Mobility, led by developer Michael Stevens, formed a
nonprofit corporation that paid for an advertising blitz against the proposal,
which is subject to a Nov. 4 public vote.

The group's lawyer, former first assistant state attorney general Andy
Taylor, said Friday that Texas election law does not require disclosure of
the contributors' names because corporations are not treated like
candidates or political advocacy groups.

"TTM has an absolute right under the First Amendment to criticize Metro's
light rail proposal whether Metro likes it or not," Taylor said.

Chronicle lawyer Joel R. White said in a letter delivered to Rosenthal's
office Friday that the newspaper believes the group must make the names
public because it is making paid political moves that are regulated by state
election law.

The Chronicle lawyer enclosed a copy of a brochure mailed to voters this
week in which Texans for True Mobility says, "Metro's Rail Plan Costs Too
Much ... Does Too Little" and "Metro's Plan Won't Work Here." TTM is
also running TV and radio ads.

Failure to disclose regulated contributions is a Class C misdemeanor,
White said. A violation carries maximum punishment of a $500 fine.

Chronicle interim Managing Editor John Wilburn said the newspaper has
pursued the disclosure of public and campaign records in several
unrelated cases over the years, "and we will continue our effort to provide
as much information to our readers as possible about this important
election issue."

Citizens for Public Transportation, the committee urging approval of
Metro's plan, has filed campaign finance statements. Monday was the
deadline to file reports covering the period up to Sept. 25.

Taylor, the TTM lawyer, said the Chronicle is making allegations that are
reckless, false and defamatory.

"If anyone had bothered to study the election code and the way that the
organization is set up, they would realize that we are in full compliance
with the spirit and the letter of all of the campaign laws," he said.

Rosenthal said he will look into the issue.

if he decides to launch an investigation, prosecutors would not announce
any conclusions or results until after the election, Rosenthal said.

"I don't want my office to influence anyone's vote," he said.

Rosenthal said he talked recently to Stevens, the TTM leader, about the
group's campaign against Metro.

TTM has created a political action committee that is expected to pay for
ads calling for a "no" vote on the referendum. Because it is a registered
political group, it must disclose its contributors.

Taylor said the nonprofit corporation could directly oppose the referendum
and still not come under the disclosure laws. But the nonprofit is intended
to be an educational group only, according to TTM.

Taylor would not say whether he is one of the contributors. Doing so might
waive the group's legal right to keep the names confidential, he said.

Metro's expansion plan features a $640 million bond issue to add 22 miles
of light rail by 2012 to the first phase, which is scheduled for completion in
January.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2150609



=PTP=================================================

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/lv-other/2003/oct/10/515724130.html

LAS VEGAS SUN
October 10, 2003

ATC selected to run new high-tech MAX bus system

By Launce Rake



ATC, the Chicago-based company that operates the public bus system
under a Regional Transportation Commission contract, has been pegged
to run another form of the region's mass transit system.

The RTC board on Thursday picked ATC to drive and maintain the MAX
system buses, a high-tech system scheduled to begin operation early next
year. The $19.4 million system is 80 percent funded by Federal Transit
Administration dollars as a "demonstration project" to test the feasibility of
the European-built Civis buses.

The buses are about 60 feet long and can accommodate 120 people, but
what makes them unique is that they will function like a light-rail commuter
system. The bus will stop at dedicated stations on its way from downtown
Las Vegas to Nellis Air Force Base. The system was dubbed the
Metropolitan Area Express, or MAX.

The first of 10 of the buses arrived at the bus system's maintenance yard
in North Las Vegas in August.

ATC has had the contract, worth about $40 million a year, to operate the
local bus system for the public RTC. Valerie Michael, ATC spokeswoman,
said her company and the RTC have made a good partnership and that
will continue with the MAX system.

She said that while ATC has been driving and maintaining buses in the
United States for 75 years, and 10 years in Las Vegas, the MAX vehicles
are a new technology.

"These are the first Civis buses in the country, so we're excited to be a
part of that," Michael said.

ingrid Reisman, RTC spokesman, said the cost of the contract is still
under negotiation but is expected to cost about $2 million yearly.

June Devoll, RTC transit operations manager, said ATC was the best of
the three companies that submitted proposals to run the new system.

"Being a demonstration project, there are a lot of unknowns," Devoll said.
"Based on all of the proposals we received, ATC had both the most
realistic costs and greatest flexibility to accommodate any challenges we
may face in the demonstration period."

California-based MV Transportation and illinois-based Laidlaw Transit,
which operates the RTC's bus service for people with disabilities, lost the
bid to operate the MAX system.



=PTP===============================================

Norfolk Virginian-Pilot
October 7, 2003

Light rail gets new attention from Beach City Council

By JASON SKOG


VIRGINIA BEACH -- Four years ago, the City Council was so miffed over
the prospect of light rail that it put its anger in writing.

One week after voters rejected a proposed light-rail train line in a
referendum, the council withdrew its funding for the project and forbid
regional officials from even studying the idea.

That was then.

At a goal-setting retreat in August, council members -- six of them new --
rekindled the idea of a light-rail link between downtown Norfolk and the
Oceanfront. They made it a top priority to buy a stretch of roughly 11 miles
of Norfolk Southern Railway right-of-way within the city limits -- the
eastern segment of the same line Norfolk leaders want for a light-rail
system.

Today, the council is expected to approve a process for purchasing the
laser-straight section from Newtown Road to Lake Holly, just west of the
resort strip.

''Whether you make a bike trail out of it or continue with light rail, it seems
to me that it's prudent to secure it while it's there,'' said Richard A.
Maddox, Beach district councilman and chairman of Hampton Road
Transit. HRT is brokering the right-of-way purchase from Norfolk Southern
along with the city of Norfolk and Norfolk State University.

The railroad company is seeking to abandon the unused section of the
line and sell it to a buyer or group of buyers in a single transaction.

While most council members are careful to say the purchase isn't a green
light for light rail, it is a clear departure from the city's previous stance.

it's also a significant switch for Maddox, who lobbied intensely against the
light-rail line coming into Virginia Beach while serving as president of the
Resort Leadership Committee.

Why the change of heart? For Maddox, new developments helped to
reshape his thoughts.

''Nothing short of a miracle has taken place in downtown Norfolk,'' he
said, ''and Town Center was nothing more than a concept five years ago.
Things have changed dramatically.''

Norfolk has continued its own pursuit of light rail since the Beach backed
out. And now, Maddox said, there's more appeal, both as a boost to mass
transit and economic development.

''Does it make sense to take it from Newtown Road to Town Center and
connect the two financial centers of Virginia Beach and Norfolk?'' he
asked. ''I think that makes a lot of sense.''

Maddox said he isn't worried about reconsidering light rail against voters'
wishes. The proposal lost in the 1999 advisory referendum, with 6,026 (56
percent) opposed and 4,698 (44 percent) in favor.

''it's worth looking into,'' he said. ''To summarily dismiss it and say the
people have spoken, well, that's just silly.''

Not all council members are as quick to express such interest.

''I haven't seen any information at this point that would cause me to
change my previous position on light rail, which was opposition to it,'' said
Vice Mayor Louis R. Jones.

Jones said he thinks the city should quickly acquire the land but should
move cautiously on the question of light rail.

''I'm not opposed to using it for mass transit,'' he said, ''but I thought the
light-rail system was fiscally irresponsible.''

He said he could support a bus rapid transit system, a cheaper alternative
that involves paving the right-of-way and using it for an express bus line.
''But in light of the referendum, I am going to be very cautious about
approving a light-rail system.''

For Councilman Peter W. Schmidt, getting the land is critical, even if
there's no consensus about what to do with it.

''We absolutely have to have that, if it's affordable,'' he said.

Councilwoman Reba S. McClanan said she supports the purchase of the
railroad property but would want the question of light rail put back before
voters.

''The people need to have input,'' she said, ''but I think it has tremendous
potential.''

Reach Jason Skog at 222-5113 or jason.skog@pilotonline.com.



=PTP===============================================

Portland Oregonian
10/10/03

No perfect fit for downtown rail line

Planners will choose one of three plans for adding tracks on the transit
mall along Fifth and Sixth avenues


FRED LEESON

Designers looking at three options for light-rail tracks through the heart of
downtown Portland are finding that no single solution provides all the right
answers.

"None is a silver bullet for every situation," said Brian McCarter, an
associate partner in the Zimmer Gunsul Frasca Partnership that is working
with TriMet, Metro and the city of Portland on the light-rail plan.

Local and regional officials hope to select a preferred alternative next
month for adding light-rail tracks on the transit mall along Fifth and Sixth
avenues between Union Station and Portland State University.

Planners started with two options earlier this year, then added a third.
Factors being weighed include bus, light-rail and auto traffic, pedestrian
access and safety, and impacts on retailing in the central business core.

"There are issues with all of them," said Alan Lehto, TriMet's transit
corridor planning manager. "No decisions have been made. These three
are still the pure options."

if a money formula can be found, TriMet wants to add tracks on the transit
mall as part of the proposed MAX extension that would run in the
interstate 205 corridor between Clackamas Town Center and Gateway.
Those trains would then join the Banfield light-rail tracks and enter
downtown through the Steel Bridge.

Planners say adding light-rail tracks on the transit mall would reinforce
Fifth and Sixth avenues as the spine for high-density development as
recognized in plans dating back to the early 1970s. Extending the tracks
to PSU would add the city's largest single-trip generator, estimated at
30,000 potential riders per day, to the light-rail system.

Retailers also want to open more mall blocks to automobile access, even
though no parking is envisioned on Fifth or Sixth.

"Allowing through traffic makes visibility and access more comfortable for
shoppers, even if they can't park right in front," Lehto said.

McCarter said planners hope to add a continuous traffic lane where
possible, even if it cannot run the transit mall's entire length. He said data
suggests that a traffic lane could handle in the range of 200 cars an hour
without interfering with bus or rail traffic.

"It can't compromise regional transit," McCarter said of auto-lane
expansion. "This is a transit spine."

in brief, here are the pluses and minuses of three possible options for
adding light-rail tracks:

Center-island stops for light rail: This option allows more room for an
automobile lane but would force pedestrians to cross one lane of car or
bus traffic to enter light-rail boarding platforms in the middle of the street.
Planners are concerned about pedestrian safety and whether the
platforms would provide an enticement for pedestrians to cross traffic
lanes in the middle of blocks.

Light-rail stops on the street's left side: This option appears best for ease
of loading and unloading light-rail passengers quickly and safely. But it
reduces opportunities of opening more blocks to auto traffic.

Light-rail stops on the street's right side: This option would require buses
and light-rail trains to leapfrog around each other to reach the right-side
curbs. It would open more left lanes for auto traffic but could create
confusing traffic patterns, especially for visitors or motorists unfamiliar with
the unusual traffic flow.

McCarter, who showed numerous maps at a public workshop
Wednesday, said left-side platforms appear to make sense on the mall
north of Burnside Street. He said the right-side option could work in the
vicinity of PSU, but he did not offer a preferred option for the retail core.

Drawings presented at public workshops identify seven light-rail platforms
along a route running between Northwest irving Street and Southwest
Jackson Street. However, a smaller version shows four stops between
irving and Southwest Main Street if regional officials can't cobble together
enough money for the longer line.

Cost estimates are $150 million for the long version and $100 million for
the shorter one.

McCarter said the longer route's benefits include adding PSU as a
destination and linking to a proposed second Southeast Portland rail line
that would run along the Southeast McLoughlin Boulevard corridor
between Portland and Milwaukie.

"Someday we might have as many rail riders entering the transit mall from
the south as we do from the north," McCarter said.

Some transit advocates have said that building a subway makes more
sense than putting light-rail trains on the mall. Planners working on the
project have issued a one-page document stating a subway might make
sense after 20 years or more, but that a subway now with an estimated $1
billion price tag is not necessary and too expensive. Fred Leeson: 503-
294-5946; fredleeson@news.oregonian.com



=PTP================================================


http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/mesa/articles/1008RailStop08z11z11.html

Arizona Republic
Oct. 8, 2003

Mesa seeks input on light-rail stop

Adam Klawonn

The first truly public glimpse of west Mesa's light rail segment comes
tonight after more than one year of negotiations involving the controversial
project.

Among early revelations: Mesa's stop at the end of the line currently has
no plans for public restrooms or paloverde trees. Neighbors recently
opposed the low-water-use trees, rail officials said, because of yellow
blossoms and pollen they create.

But tonight's open house is a meet-and-greet for residents near the
proposed transit center just east of Dobson Road and Main Street at the
site of the former Tri-City Mall. The open house will be held from 6 to 8
p.m. at Webster Elementary School, 202 N. Sycamore. It includes a brief
overview of the project's latest happenings, a small Q&A session and a
mixer where residents can meet rail engineers and designers and give
input.

"it's like a cocktail party without the cocktails," said Sue Lewin, Valley
Metro Rail's public involvement manager for the area.

Mesa's piece of the billion-dollar project is a 1.1-mile segment connecting
it to a Valley-wide rail line ending near 19th Avenue and Bethany Home
Road in west Phoenix.

The open house was delayed while city and rail officials settled on a site
for the rail stop. It was a contest between the former mall site and the
East Valley institute of Technology, whose board effectively tabled the
issue and drove it back toward Philadelphia-based Amerimar's Tri-City
Pavilion site this year.

So far, developers agreed to contribute about $200,000 to help design a
rail stop that officials hope 2,000 people will use daily.

The city, Valley Metro Rail and developers are now about three months
away from a final lease agreement at the former mall site, said Jeff Martin,
Mesa's assistant Development Services manager.

Amerimar would keep 4 acres for development and the city would lease
11 acres for a Park-N-Ride and quick drop-off lot called a "Kiss-N-Ride."

"We as a city did not want to get into the redevelopment business in this
area," Martin said. "We thought that was best left to the private sector."



=PTP===========================================

http://www.njo.com/newsflash/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1065813843135230.xml

Associated Press
10/10/2003


State adds 6 more 'Transit Villages'

COLLINGSWOOD, N.J. (AP) — The state tabbed six additional
communities as
"transit villages" on Friday and allocated $1.2 million to fund projects
there aimed at getting people out of cars and onto mass transit.


At a ceremony near the Collingswood PATCO station, Transportation
Commissioner Jack Lettiere announced six new transit villages and a
$200,000 grant for each community. They included: Collingswood, Bound
Brook, Belmar, Bloomfield, Matawan and Cranford.


The money will be used for a range of improvements including
streetscaping, road improvements, bicycle paths and station renovations.


"If we want to take cars off our highways, we must make mass transit a
viable option, not a last resort," said Lettiere.


The transit village program is designed to spur economic development,
urban revitalization and private-sector investment around public
transportation. A designated transit village is a community with a bus,
train, light rail or ferry station that has developed a plan to encourage
transit-oriented development.



=PTP===============================================

* Arnold's Florida auditor may ax CA high-speed rail

[BATN]

San Jose Mercury News
October 10, 2003

'Tough' expert to assess state's fiscal problems

Schwarzenegger recruits Florida's budget director for transition team


By Barry Witt and Mary Anne Ostrom
Mercury News


Working for Republican governors in three states, Donna Arduin has
played the role of Scrooge for a dozen years with Oscar-caliber
performances.


Thursday, California's governor-elect charged her with looking under
every rock in Sacramento to help him find cuts that will let him make
good on his pledge to roll back the car tax and balance the state
budget without raising taxes.


"She will cure what ails you," said Johnnie Byrd, the Republican
speaker of the House of Representatives in Florida, where Arduin has
been Gov. Jeb Bush's budget director since 1999. "She's a tough
fiscal conservative, and you can underline tough."


Arduin -- who is taking a leave from her Florida job but plans to
return by January -- will oversee the outside audit of state
government that Arnold Schwarzenegger promised would form the core of
his budget plan. Her first task is to get a grip on just how big a
financial problem the state faces.


"As somebody coming from another state, I haven't seen a clear answer
to the question the governor has been asking, so the first thing we
need to do is give him the answers," Arduin said. "I'm going to get
down to Sacramento this afternoon and get to work."


Before joining Bush, the 40-year-old Duke University graduate served
in the budget offices of New York Gov. George Pataki and Michigan
Gov. John Engler.


"She has helped three governors in three significant-sized states
bring structure to their budgets, bring reform and bring crises under
control. That's her track record," said Schwarzenegger spokesman Rob
Stutzman.


Schwarzenegger called her "a great talent."


in Florida, Arduin oversees a $53 billion state budget -- slightly
more than half the size of California's -- and has instituted
a "performance-based" system that measures what government
departments produce rather than just how much they spend.


in Bush's first year in office, she helped him find more than $300
million in what were described as legislators' "pet projects" to veto
from the budget. This year, Bush killed early funding for a high-
speed rail system that Florida voters already had approved, a subject
that could have significance in California because voters next year
are scheduled to consider a similar system that would add to the
state's deficit.


Arduin "has been very successful at having us live within our means
without raising taxes," said Byrd, the conservative Florida
speaker. "She knows how to go through a budget with a fine-toothed
comb and find every dollar." Byrd said Schwarzenegger's decision to
bring her in "is probably one of the best moves he could ever make."



Contact Barry Witt at bwitt@mercurynews.com or (408) 920-5703.





PTP Digest 2003/10/10-A = CONTENTS

* Ca's Arnold: Zap transit, zap HOV lanes, build freeway lanes
   Bay Area Transportation News October 10, 2003

* Denver: Plan pushed to restore LRT extensions
   Rocky Mountain News October 9, 2003

* Denver: Union Station planned as major transit hub
   Denver Post  Friday, October 10, 2003

* Houston anti-rail group's funding under scrutiny
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 9, 2003

* Seattle monorail's staffing budget 'balloons' despite fiscal crisis
   TheStranger.com Vol 13 No. 4, Oct 9 - Oct 15 2003

* Seattle: Cash-strapped monorail tops want tax crackdown
   KING-TV 5 News Thursday, October 9, 2003

* Seattle LRT agency asks contractor for bid extension
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, October 10, 2003

* Seattle: Road plans now hostage to LRT funding?
   King County Journal 2003-10-09

* Seattle suburbs: Railway could become LRT route
   King County Journal (Seattle) 2003-10-09

* Oakland: San Pablo Ave "Rapid Bus" finally gets official 'grand opening'
   Contra Costa Times October 10, 2003

* Cincinnati: LRT/road plan for I-75 corridor gets regional OK
   Cincinnati Enquirer Friday, October 10, 2003

* Cincinnati: More details on LRT/road plan for I-75 corridor
   CINCINNATI POST 10-10-2003

* Cincinnati: Area traffic up tenfold since 1982
   Cincinnati Post 10-01-2003

* Cincinnati: Background to I-75 LRT/road planning
   Cincinnati Enquirer Tuesday, September 30, 2003

* LA: Major redevelopment planned for subway station area
   Los Angeles Times October 9, 2003

* No. Ca: 'indirect pollution' fees sought for San Joaquin Valley
   Sacramento Bee Tuesday, October 7, 2003


=PTP==========================================

Bay Area Transportation News
October 10, 2003

Arnold's Views on Transportation

(source: http://www.joinarnold.com/en/agenda/arnoldsviews.php)


Q: What measures would you take to reduce gridlock and improve the
state's transportation system in these times of tight budgets?


A: California has some of the worst roads in the nation. We need a
world-class transportation system, including roads, rail, ports and
airports, to maintain the quality of life for all Californians and to
keep our economy strong. Texas has recently surpassed California as
the nation's top exporter and that is merely a taste of what is to
come.


The current state budget includes another $856 million in loans of
Proposition 42 funds to the state general fund. This brings to nearly
$2.5 billion the amount the state government has borrowed from
various transportation funds.


As Governor, I will order a top to bottom review of California's
transportation needs and create a multilevel plan to bring our system
up to the qualifications Californians deserve. I will seek to
implement innovative, market-based means of reducing congestion on
California's highways.



Q: The California Transportation Commission estimates that the
state's roads and highways need $100 billion in repairs or expansion.
How can the state pay for that?


Anyone that has driven on our highways during rush hour knows that
our highway system is in crisis. Californians pay the third highest
per vehicle tax in the nation, but ranks 50th in per capita spending
on roads. In the past decade, the time Californians spend stuck in
traffic has more than doubled. Resolving the transportation crisis in
California will mean ending the status quo in Sacramento. This will
take leadership.


* The first step is to commit to no more stealing of transportation
revenues. Over the past three years, the Davis administration has
stolen(*) more then $4.5 billion in transportation revenues to pay
for his other spending programs.


* The next piece of the solution is to redistribute transportation
revenues away from costly transit programs to pay for more freeway
lanes in the most congested areas.


* Along those same lines, we have the capacity to create more highway
capacity in just the areas where it is most needed without spending
another penny. We must convert the High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes
(HOV)
to free flow lanes, so that all the taxpayers who paid for those
lanes and are now sitting in traffic jams can use them.


* Another important element of the solution is to take the sales tax
revenues generated from the sale of new and used vehicles toward
transportation programs. Between state and local taxes, this would
amount to over $3 billion per year.


* The final element of the solution would be the creation of a
dedicated stream of revenue specific to transportation
infrastructure. This would commit to 1% of the General Fund to be
invested in construction and maintenance programs and would represent
an additional $7.8 billion over the next decade.


Between all the elements of this plan, California would be committing
over $12 billion per year to pay for transportation infrastructure,
achieving the CTC's goal of $100 billion in less than a decade.



(*) [BATN: See related stories on the "stolen" transportation funds:


"Borrowed" $2.2B transit cash may hit 800 projects
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/13548


Davis', CA's transportation funding schemes crash
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/13140


Caltrans broke; state transport funds "laundered"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/13102 ]




=PTP================================================

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_
2333530,00.html

Rocky Mountain News
October 9, 2003

RTD rekindles original vision

Agency pushes plan for more light rail cut in budget slump

By Kevin Flynn, Rocky Mountain News

The Regional Transportation District wants to restore rail lines that it cut
from its FasTracks rapid transit proposal. The trade-off might be less
service and parking systemwide.

"We're rerunning our financial models to see what we can build and in
what time frame," Cal Marsella, RTD general manager, said Wednesday.


RTD plans to ask voters in November 2004 for a hike of 0.4 cents in its
metro sales tax, raising it to a full penny on a $1 purchase, to pay for
FasTracks, a system of new light rail, buses, park-n-rides and trains.

in August, the agency said the slumping economy no longer would
produce the amount of tax revenue RTD needs to pay for the $5.1 billion
program, so it was cut to $4.2 billion.

As a result, some parts of the plan were shifted to a proposed "Phase II"
that would be built when the economy improves.

Among the cuts were commuter rail from Boulder to Longmont; light rail
from Olde Town Arvada to Ward Road; light rail from Denver Federal
Center to Golden; light rail from 124th Avenue to Colorado 7 in Adams
County; and extension of current southwest light rail into Highlands
Ranch.

The cuts drew criticism from suburban officials and the public. Marsella
said that prompted the rethinking.

"We heard from the Jefferson County commissioners, Longmont, Adams
County and Highlands Ranch that they didn't want to do two phases,"
Marsella said.

The biggest concern: Voters already served by rail in the first phase would
be inclined to vote against expansion in the future for outlying areas.

in Jefferson County, where the end-of-line station had been cut back from
the county government center to the Federal Center in Lakewood,
Commissioner Michelle Lawrence was glad to have the original concept
reconsidered.

"it's the logical ending place for the West Corridor line to come out to the
government center," she said. "Face it, we're a transit hub here already
with C-470, interstate 70 and Sixth Avenue coming together."

Marsella said restoring the cuts looks "promising" but it hasn't yet been
determined to be financially feasible. A revised plan will be presented to
the RTD board in November.

"There's very strong support on the board for the revised concept,"
Marsella said.

But it carries a price: cuts in the number of parking spaces at stations and
reductions in the number of trains and frequency of service. It also could
extend the construction period beyond the 10 years outlined in the original
plan.

While welcomed, the new proposal has raised some concerns.

"We're going to have to watch the parking issue very carefully to make
sure it's adequate," said Debra Baskett, director of the U.S. 36
Transportation Mobility Organization, which works for improvements along
the Boulder Turnpike.

But overall, Baskett said she is pleased with the new direction.

Adams County Commission Chairwoman Elaine Valente remained
skeptical that RTD could make it work. She cited proposed cuts in service
to help finance all the construction.

"I'll try to be optimistic and hope they can pull it off. But you just can't have
it all if the money isn't there."



=PTP===============================================

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~1688366,00.html#

Denver Post
Friday, October 10, 2003

Union Station transit-hub plan unveiled

By Jeffrey Leib
Denver Post Staff Writer

Denver's historic Union Station would become a transportation hub with
rail and regional bus stations located underground and commercial
buildings reaching 15 stories above, under a plan announced Thursday.
Full buildout of the Union Station "vision plan," as officials called it, would
cost $560 million.

Passage by metro voters of RTD's proposed FasTracks transit expansion
plan would be a catalyst for redevelopment of the Union Station site,
officials said.

FasTracks carries a price tag of at least $4.3 billion. About $250 million of
that total is earmarked for Union Station redevelopment, said Liz Rao,
planning chief for the Regional Transportation District.

The plans unveiled Thursday are part of a $5.3 million multi-year study.
By burying the rail and bus stations, 18th Street would no longer have to
dead end at the station but would go through to the Platte Valley.

The Union Station study is a joint venture of RTD, the Colorado
Department of Transportation, the Denver Regional Council of
Governments and the city and county of Denver.

The redevelopment plan estimates it would cost $230 million to construct
an underground light- rail station and about $120 million each for a
separate passenger-rail station and a regional bus station, both also
underground.

The passenger-rail station would handle Amtrak trains, the Ski Train and
possible future commuter-rail trains to Denver international Airport,
Boulder and Longmont.

it also would be constructed for "through service" in a way that would
allow a possible Front Range passenger train that would travel between
Fort Collins and Colorado Springs with stops at Union Station.

Currently, passenger trains that use Union Station come to a dead end
there and must back out to exit the terminal.

The Union Station plan also calls for private transportation services -
including Greyhound and charter buses, taxicabs and rental car
companies - to be located near the rail and RTD stations.

One RTD light-rail line, the C Line that snakes through the Central Platte
Valley past Invesco Field and the Pepsi Center, now uses Union Station.

Downtown Denver's 16th Street Mall shuttle bus also terminates at the
station, parts of which date to 1881.

RTD, Denver and their partners bought the station for $50 million in 2001
from the Union Pacific Railroad and other property owners.

With FasTracks, RTD plans to add at least five more light-rail and
commuter-rail lines in the metro area that would feed into Union Station as
a transit hub.

To raise the $4.3 billion, RTD plans to ask voters in the seven-county
metro area to approve a hike in the transit district's sales tax to 1 percent
from the current 0.6 percent. That vote could come in November 2004.

if the FasTracks tax plan is rejected, planners "would assess the revenue
streams we do have and modify the buildout plan for Union Station based
on available revenues," Rao said.

The proposed new FasTracks rail lines that would serve Union Station
include one to Lakewood and Golden and another that would parallel
portions of interstate 70 to serve Arvada.

A commuter-rail line would go from Union Station to Longmont, with
intermediate stops in Westminster, Louisville and Boulder.

One other line would roughly parallel interstate 25 to north Adams County,
and a commuter line would link Union Station with DIA.




=PTP==============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 9, 2003


Anti-rail group's funding under scrutiny

By LUCAS WALL and ALAN BERNSTEIN


The refusal of an anti-rail organization to tell voters where its money
comes from continued to draw scrutiny today, including from two of the
group's own advisers.

Since Monday, Texans for True Mobility has declined to release
statements about the money it has collected and spent in its campaign to
defeat the Metropolitan Transit Authority's Nov. 4 transit-expansion
referendum. But Sen. Kyle Janek, R-Houston, a member of the group,
questions the strategy.

"It is always good when people disclose," said Janek, who, along with
Harris County Republican Party Chairman Jared Woodfill, supported the
records' release Thursday."When you get into these political issues I think
disclosure is better than non-disclosure."

Woodfill, also a TTM adviser, said he would have no problem disclosing
the names of contributors who don't specifically ask to remain
anonymous.

Texans for True Mobility, led by developer Michael Stevens, has blitzed
voters with advertisements this week trashing Metro's expansion plan, the
centerpiece of which is a $640 million bond issue to add 22 miles of light
rail by 2012.

Metro itself has been criticized for using taxpayer money to tout the
benefits of light rail in its advertising.

Janek said it was galling that Metro's "informational" ads seem to
encourage voting for the referendum.

"I know who their contributors are, and I am one of them," he said,
referring to the Metro sales tax he pays. "And I am not happy about it."

Advocates for open political campaigns decried TTM's decision to form
two separate entities bearing the same name: a nonprofit corporation to
"educate" voters about the flaws in Metro's plan and a political action
committee to "advocate" for the referendum's defeat.

Donations to nonprofit corporations are not required to be disclosed under
state election laws. Contributions to political action committees, on the
other hand, must be disclosed.

TTM's nonprofit arm funded the initial ad blitz, which is why the group said
it did not file a campaign finance disclosure by Monday's deadline. But
those ads cross the line from education into advocating against the Metro
plan, several observers said Thursday.

A four-page color mailer from TTM arriving in mailboxes this week, for
example, has phrases such as, "Metro's Rail Plan: Costs Too Much ...
Does Too Little," "What's Wrong With Metro's Plan? Just About
Everything," and "We cannot afford to waste these precious public
dollars."

Tom Smith of Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy organization, is
among several political campaign watchdogs in Austin who said they've
received complaints about the ads.

"it's absolutely critical that citizens know who is providing this money,"
Smith said. "Car dealers and tire companies and auto manufacturers
could be dumping tens of thousands of dollars in cash into advertisements
to defeat this because rail cuts into their market share."

TTM responds it has a First Amendment right to speak out on a plan
proposed by a government agency so long as does not advocate "vote no
Nov. 4" or "kill this plan." Andy Taylor, the group's attorney, said it is
carefully following the Texas Election Code.

Though the code appears on its face to broadly require disclosure of any
spending "in connection with an election on a measure," Taylor said, the
U.S. Supreme Court has ruled such a provision is unconstitutional unless
interpreted to ban only spending advocating for passage or failure.

Smith said his group is considering lodging a formal complaint against
TTM with the Texas Ethics Commission, the state agency that enforces
campaign finance rules.

Karen Lundquist, the commission's director, said she could not comment
on the legality of TTM campaign language. The commission or a judge
would have to decide if the political communication fit the category that
requires donor disclosure, she said.

Citizens for Public Transportation, the committee urging approval of
Metro's plan, has filed campaign finance statements and wants the other
side to do so as well.

"If these aren't political advertisements, I've never seen any," Ed Wulfe,
the developer leading the pro side, said of the TTM campaign. "The public
is entitled to know who's behind their aggressive negative approach."

Bob Stein, a Rice University political scientist, said refusing to reveal
campaign donors -- even if legal -- raises eyebrows.

"What are they hiding?" he asked. "Why wouldn't you want to signal to
people there are community leaders out there who are opposed to this?"

Chris Begala, TTM spokesman, said his nonprofit group is free to discuss
issues just as liberal groups American Civil Liberties Union and League of
United Latin American Citizens. Both those civil-rights organizations
supported a bid by the conservative Texas Association of Business to
keep its 2002 political donations private, worried they might lose donors if
they knew their gifts would be publicly disclosed.

A Travis County grand jury is investigating whether the business coalition
crossed the line in airing "issue ads" in support of Republican legislative
candidates, and a judge has cited its executives for contempt of court.

in a related issue, Metro said TTM has not filed a required form
designating the treasurer of its political action committee. But Taylor
disputed that Thursday, saying he sent the paperwork to the transit
authority last month.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2148298



=PTP=========================================

http://www.thestranger.com/current/city3.html

TheStranger.com
Vol 13 No. 4, Oct 9 - Oct 15 2003

PAY CHECK

Monorail Staffing Budget Balloons

Erica Barnett

if monorail revenues continue to come in, as they have for the past
several months, about one-third under predictions, Seattle Monorail
Project planners may find themselves looking for drastic cost-saving
measures. One place they might consider cutting is the agency's payroll,
which has ballooned since last December, when the monorail project
adopted a $58.5 million first-year budget that included $5.5 million for
salaries and benefits for 40 to 45 employees. That budget was amended
upward by 47 percent this past April, to $86 million; simultaneously, the
SMP's staffing level increased to nearly 70 full- and part-time employees.

Monorail spokesperson Paul Bergman explains the agency's swelling
payroll as an investment that will pay off in the future: By doing a lot of the
initial design work itself, the SMP hopes to save money on its "design-
build-operate-maintain" contract, to be awarded in 2004. Doing work now
that would otherwise be done by contractors later, Bergman says, could
"lower the amount of contingency [wiggle room for unexpected costs] the
contractors will place in their bids."

But that explanation doesn't answer another, more significant question:
Why are average salaries at the SMP so much higher than those at
similar public agencies, like Sound Transit? Of the monorail agency's full-
timers, 18 make over $100,000 a year; nearly 50 make $50,000 or more.
The salaries range from $29,000 to $172,000 (SMP director Joel Horn's
salary); the average salary, at around $75,000, is nearly 20 percent higher
than the $63,000 average made by Sound Transit's full-time employees.
"We felt the salary ranges were reasonable [compared to] what other
transit agencies were doing," Bergman says, noting that salaries are still
less than one percent of the project's total estimated cost.

in addition to its own 69 employees, the SMP also funds 10 positions at
the city, at a total cost through 2004 of $3 million. Ethan Melone, the city's
monorail program manager, says the city and the SMP will sign another
$3 million agreement at the end of October, to fund another 10 positions
through 2004.


barnett@thestranger.com




=PTP================================================

http://www.king5.com/localnews/stories/NW_100903WAmonorail_taxEL.5
a0f307.html

KING-TV 5 News
Thursday, October 9, 2003

Monorail aims to crack down on tax evaders

BY AUSTIN JENKINS / KING 5 News


SEATTLE - The cash-strapped Seattle monorail project is preparing to
crack down on people who evade the new monorail tax by registering
outside the city. But it's unclear whether the monorail has any real
authority to force residents to pay up

The monorail project says it has anecdotal evidence that some residents
are registering their cars out of the city to avoid the monorail tax. But now
it wants hard evidence.

So Monorail officials are asking the state to turn over names and
addresses of suspected tax evaders. They also met Wednesday with car-
licensing agents to make sure they report suspected evaders to the state
Licensing Department.


[PHOTO]
KING
The current monorail only runs a short distance - from Seattle Center to
Westlake Center downtown.


But with no authority to prosecute these people, the effort may have more
bark than bite.

At Ballard Auto Licensing, most customers are law-abiding citizens who
just need to renew their car tabs. But once in a while someone comes in
with a story that doesn't add up, such as "differences in addresses on
their checks versus addresses on their drivers license versus what they're
telling us in person," said June Neu, manager of Ballard Auto Licensing.

The clerks are trained to watch out for fraud. But now the Seattle monorail
project is asking them to help stop Seattle residents who register their
cars to an out-of-city address in order to avoid paying the new monorail
tax.

"We need everyone to pay the taxes," said Joel Horn of the Seattle
Monorail project. "Not only is it a law, it's fair and I think for all those
people that are paying the tax they should be really angry that other
people are cheating on the taxes."

There are drivers on both sides of the issue.

"Maybe that's a form of evading the tax, but on the other hand you can
totally understand that people are trying to save money, especially in
these times," said Yvonne Silva, a Seattle resident.

"I think if they live in the city, then they accept the cost associated with the
cost of living in the city," said Doug Pelt, another Seattle resident.

Currently monorail revenues are running about 25 percent below
projections. Project director Joel Horn said tax evaders are part of the
problem.

"If people are going to cheat on their taxes they've basically cheating on
themselves, they're cheating on their neighbors, they're cheating on their
kids," he said.

At the Ballard License office, staff said they're willing to cooperate, but
only to a certain point.

"We're not to confront customers face-to-face and we're certainly not
going to list every name of an address change," said Neu.


=PTP=============================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/143326_transit10.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Friday, October 10, 2003

Sound Transit asks contractor for bid extension

By JANE HADLEY
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

Doubts about a $500 million federal grant have forced Sound Transit to
ask a company to extend by two weeks its highly attractive bid for
construction work on Seattle's light rail line in the hopes that the money
being held up in Congress will come through by then.

The bid expires today, but whether a two-week extension would be
enough to free up the money in Washington, D.C., is unknown.

"We are living in a world of a lot of uncertainty right now," Sound Transit
Chief Executive Joni Earl said yesterday. "We are working through all the
issues as fast as we can, because there's taxpayer's money involved."

The Federal Transit Administration has approved the grant, but an
Oklahoma congressman who is chairman of the House Appropriations
subcommittee that hands out federal transportation dollars has put a hold
on it until his questions are answered.

Sound Transit has said it will not begin construction on Seattle's long-
awaited $2.44 billion, 14-mile light rail line until the federal government
officially signs off on the grant agreement.

The hold by Republican Rep. Ernest Istook Jr. puts at risk the $95 million
bid by Kiewit Pacific Co., which came in about $16 million below
engineers' estimates for the work.

if the Kiewit bid expires, Sound Transit would have to rebid the package, a
process that would take 2 1/2 to 3 months, possibly raise the price of the
project and delay its completion, Sound Transit spokesman Geoff Patrick
said.

The contract involves building a maintenance base near the former
Rainier Brewery, a light rail trackway from the south end of the downtown
bus tunnel to the base and a station at South Lander Street.

Dave Zemek, vice president of Kiewit Pacific, said in an interview
yesterday that the company would respond today to Sound Transit's
request for an extension.

Earl made the formal request Wednesday night, although the company
and the transit agency were in informal discussions before that.

Zemek said the company was "polling" its subcontractors and suppliers to
make sure they were willing to extend their bids to Kiewit.

in an interview before a Sound Transit board meeting yesterday, King
County Executive Ron Sims, chairman of the board, indicated he believed
Kiewit would agree to the request, saying, "We obviously are very
pleased."

But two weeks was apparently about as long as Kiewit is able or willing to
go. The bid was submitted June 12 and was to remain valid for 120 days,
which is today.

"I think they were very, very nervous about being able to go beyond two
weeks," Sims said.

Already some subcontractors and suppliers are experiencing some cost
increases, Sims said.

Sound Transit officials sent a seven-page letter to Istook last Friday that
sought to answer his concerns as to how the agency would be able to pay
its 80 percent share of the light rail line if the state Supreme Court's ruling
on initiative 776 deprives the agency of revenues from a 0.3 percent
motor vehicle excise tax.

As of yesterday, Sound Transit had still not heard from Istook.
Furthermore, his aide told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer last week that he
had other questions besides those about the initiative.

Rep. Jennifer Dunn, R-Wash., has also raised objections, saying she is
concerned that the Seattle project might dip into revenues reserved for
Eastside projects.

Sound Transit formally asked the state high court to expedite its decision
on initiative 776 in order to preserve the favorable bids. But last week the
justices denied that request, a court spokeswoman said.


=PTP============================================

http://www.mi-reporter.com/sited/story/html/145634

King County Journal
2003-10-09

Light-rail may delay I-90 project

by Jeff Switzer


An effort to squeeze two new HOV lanes onto the interstate 90 floating
bridges is on hold because of Seattle's quest for a half-billion in light rail
money.

Seattle officials -- who endorsed a cross-lake agreement for two-way HOV
lanes on I-90 in July --say light-rail funding must come first.

The I-90 agreement had been scheduled for a key vote of the Sound
Transit executive board last week, but was delayed.

''That action is now on hold until the future of the full-funding grant
agreement is clarified and we have it in hand,'' said Seattle Deputy Mayor
Tim Ceis. ''Once we get it, the agreements are all back on track and
ready to go ahead.''

The goal: Persuade U.S. Rep. Jennifer Dunn of Bellevue to suspend her
opposition to $500 million in federal light-rail funds, key to building the
$2.5-billion rail project from downtown Seattle to Tukwila.

Dunn supports the proposed I-90 project, which would build the first all-
day HOV lanes across Lake Washington connecting the Eastside and
Seattle.

i-90 now has reversible express lanes that head into Seattle in the
morning and to the Eastside in the evening, leaving Seattle car-poolers to
struggle through gridlock on the way to Eastside jobs.

Buses also get stuck in the reverse traffic when crossing the lake, Sound
Transit officials say. The $128 million project would solve those problems.

''it's very frustrating,'' Mercer island Deputy Mayor Bryan Cairns said.
''We've spent years -- Mercer island together with Seattle and the
Eastside -- in arriving at the conclusion that (option) R8a is the best plan
to service the area and decrease congestion.''

''We need to move forward with this plan and delays -- should they occur,
due to regional politics affecting other issues -- are extremely
unfortunate,'' he said. ''We hope for an early resolution in favor of R8a.''

Option R8a is the plan that would restripe the current eight-lane freeway
into 10 lanes by narrowing six lanes. The bridge deck would not be
expanded.

Seattle's delay on the I-90 agreement must mean they don't think it's
important, said Dunn's spokeswoman Danielle Holland.

''That's their choice. That's their decision.'' Holland said.

Dunn still wants a legal promise that Sound Transit won't raid Eastside tax
dollars if Seattle light rail goes over budget, Holland said.

The I-90 agreement allows two new HOV lanes to be built only if all sides
also push for high-capacity transit in the reversible center lanes. For
Seattle, ''high-capacity transit'' means light rail; Eastside officials want to
also consider bus rapid transit.

Light rail must be built in Seattle before it can cross I-90 to the Eastside,
Ceis said, which shows the two projects are linked.

Bellevue Mayor Connie Marshall, who helped forge the cross-lake bargain
on I-90, disagreed.

Many Seattle officials are chafed that Dunn, an Eastside Republican,
would target federal light-rail funding.

''The city of Seattle is not trying to set transportation policy for the
Eastside, and Bellevue is not trying to set transportation policy for
Seattle,'' Ceis said. ''We work well together if we maintain that respect for
each other.

''Unfortunately, Jennifer Dunn doesn't have that same viewpoint.''

County Executive Ron Sims, Sound Transit chairman, said it was his
decision to pull I-90 from last week's board agenda.

''I wanted to avoid a collision of heated, intense political rhetoric that
would not serve the region well at all,'' Sims said.

Board members besides Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels are angry that Dunn
is critical of light rail funding, Sims said. Sims wouldn't say who.

it's a delicate and diplomatic time, he said.

''The reason why nothing ever happens around here is because these
kinds of conflicts occur,'' Sims said. ''These are feelings best worked out
in private, and a cooling-off period serves everybody's interest so that the
bridges of discourse remain up and not burned down.''

U.S. Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., chairman of the Appropriations
Subcommittee on Transportation, recently met with federal transit officials
who have promised answers to his concerns about light-rail costs.

Istook wants Sound Transit to show how it would cover light-rail costs if a
pending Supreme Court decision eliminates the agency's ability to collect
motor-vehicle excise taxes.



=PTP============================================

http://www.kingcountyjournal.com/sited/story/html/145682

King County Journal (Seattle)
2003-10-09

Railway may sell line; tracks from Woodinville to Renton could become
home to light-rail route

by Jeff Switzer
Journal Reporter

The railroad line from Renton to Woodinville -- home to the Spirit of
Washington Dinner Train -- might be for sale.

For more than a decade, that line has been eyed as a possible future
light-rail corridor running parallel to interstate 405.

State transportation officials were recently approached by representatives
of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, said state Transportation
Secretary Doug MacDonald.

''They came to us a week or two ago and said they'd like a sit-down to
discuss their future plans'' for the Renton-Woodinville line, MacDonald
told the Journal on Wednesday.

''it's premature to jump to any conclusion on what the outcome might be.
It really just came on the horizon and a lot of people will be very
interested.''

MacDonald said he wants to discuss the rail line property with the Senate
and House transportation chairmen for advice on the next steps.

''it's not clear yet what all would be involved or what the options are,''
MacDonald said. ''The local governments have to get involved, and the
Legislature. We wouldn't make this decision without a lot of thought.''

Details from the railroad were scarce. ''BNSF is always studying the
status of various lines of low profitability, systemwide, and one area under
current review is the Woodinville line,'' said spokesman Gus Melonas.
''We are looking into alternatives for this line, which is consistent practice
in this type of situation.''

Melonas wouldn't give details.

The line runs through downtown Renton, along the Lake Washington
waterfront and parallel to interstate 405, then travels up the Sammamish
River Valley to the Columbia Winery and Woodinville.

The route was studied in 1987 as a possible Eastside light-rail route, to no
end. The Dinner Train began operations on those tracks in Renton in
1992.

Two years ago, debates over whether to expand I-405 included some
discussions of a light-rail line on those tracks, or a possible $300 million
expenditure to preserve the land for transportation.

''This thing been under discussion since time immemorial,'' MacDonald
said.

No action was taken because the line has actively carried the Dinner Train
and an occasional Boeing shipment.

''it should be improved for a transportation corridor,'' said Jim Cusick,
commuter rail advocate with Washington Association of Railroad
Passengers, a pro-rail lobbying group.

Cusick, a Bothell computer programmer and former member of the I-405
advisory committee, pushed to have some kind of commuter rail -- light
rail or heavy rail -- along the BNSF line. Renton officials and Kennydale
residents opposed the move and it went no farther.

Until now.

''I'm in the minority: pro rail and pro high-capacity transit,'' Cusick said. ''i
always thought the Eastside route was a cost-effective way to get rail on
the Eastside.''

He sympathizes with neighbors who live near the tracks, but said
commuter trains could be quieter than freight trains. Also, the Dinner Train
might be able to share the tracks with commuter trains and freight trains,
he said.

''if it's lost as a rail line, it would be an unfortunate event,'' Cusick said.

Jeff Switzer can be reached at jeff.switzer@kingcountyjournal.com or 425-
453-4234.



=PTP============================================

* AC Transit San Pablo Ave "Rapid Bus" grand opening

[BATN]

Contra Costa Times
October 10, 2003

Rapid Bus gets official welcome celebration


By Tom Lochner
Contra Costa Times


With a Dixieland band playing "San Pablo Avenue Blues," officials of
seven cities, two counties, several state and regional agencies and a
Belgian bus manufacturer hopped on an AC Transit 72R bus Thursday to
a "smart" transit exhibit and ceremony in front of Oakland City Hall.


The event was the official grand opening of AC Transit's "Rapid Bus"
 service along San
Pablo Avenue from Oakland to El Cerrito, San Pablo and Richmond that
began June 30.


The roughly three month delay allowed officials to fine-tune the
service, which features an infrared emitter on buses that can delay a
green light from turning red; a Global Positioning System-based
vehicle locator; and a three-door, low-floor bus with an ultra-quiet
diesel engine.


"People thought it was an electric bus," said AC Transit board member
Chris Peeples. "You can stand back there next to the engine and have
a conversation at a normal volume."


in Oakland, medians were built to limit cross-traffic. Yet to be
installed are electronic displays in bus shelters along the route
announcing the amount of time until the next bus.


The Rapid is part of a movement dubbed intelligent Transportation
Systems (ITS). Among its more intelligent aspects, officials say, is
the capital cost, which is anywhere from 5 to 50 times less than
light rail, depending on whether you include such enhancements as
separate bus-only lanes.


"It gives you about the same speed advantage as light rail," Peeples
said. "(The 72R) is about the least costly form of rapid bus transit."


The 72R is the first Rapid Bus program in Northern California, AC
Transit board president Pat Piras said.


it also represents a breakthrough for Belgium-based Van Hool NV,
whose AC Transit order for 191 buses is its first in North America,
assistant sales manager Francis Stevens said.


A Van Hool bus with an American-built Cummins engine costs about
$300,000, roughly the same as other AC Transit buses manufactured by
Gillig Corp. of Hayward, officials said.


Piras also thanked Caltrans employee Roger Hoosin [BATN: Hooson] for
coming up with the idea for the Rapid Bus in 1995 after he saw a
similar system in Dublin, ireland.


Officials hope the Rapid will spell the end of transit riders' blues
on San Pablo Avenue and attract new riders, which they say is already
happening.


Ridership on the corridor, which also carries the local 72 and 72M
buses, is up 22 percent to about 17,000 a day, Peeples said.


The Rapid makes 26 stops spaced about half a mile apart on San Pablo
Avenue from Contra Costa College in San Pablo to downtown Oakland,
then on to Jack London Square via Broadway. Average end-to-end travel
time is 57 minutes; the 72L, which the Rapid replaced, took 72
minutes with limited stops on the 15-mile corridor, with a detour to
the El Cerrito Plaza BART station.


"it's an enormous difference in how long it takes you to go to work,"
said Berkeley City Councilman Kriss Worthington, a daily 72R
passenger whose partner lives in San Pablo.


The one-way fare is $1.50, the same as on AC Transit's other
non-premium fare buses.



Reach Tom Lochner at 510-262-2760 or tlochner@cctimes.com




=PTP=============================================

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2003/10/10/loc_i75.10.html

Cincinnati Enquirer
Friday, October 10, 2003

i-75 plan with rail passes

Total cost to be billions

By James Pilcher

QUEENSGATE - The region's main transportation planning agency
Thursday overwhelmingly approved a mix of highway expansion and a
new light-rail line as the best way to fix traffic on interstate 75.

The 39-4 vote by the board of the Ohio-Kentucky-indiana Regional
Council of Governments came almost a year after Hamilton County voters
roundly defeated a proposed sales-tax increase that would have helped
pay for a light-rail system.

WHAT'S NEXT

The I-75 plan will now formally be considered for the region's 30-year,
long-range transportation plan, which is updated every three years.
That updating process is expected to be complete by spring.

Entities such as the Ohio Department of Transportation then can seek
federal money for design and construction. In addition, local funding
needs to be found for light rail.Preliminary estimates on how long full
implementation would take range from 15 to 25 years.

"It isn't going to solve the problem tomorrow, and it might not get built
tomorrow, but we had to try and come up with alternatives so we do not
leave our children and grandchildren insurmountable problems," said Ken
Reed, the president of OKI's board and the agency's acting executive
director. "We've got to start dealing with these issues now ... and this is a
critical step toward that."

The plan is the result of a three-year, $6 million study. It calls for:

• Widening the freeway to four lanes continuously from the Ohio River
through Hamilton, Butler and Warren counties.

• A light-rail line with trains every three minutes during rush hour and five
minutes in off-peak times, at a cost of $1.83 billion in current dollars.

Those figures do not include an estimated $428 million in renovations and
improvements already planned for the highway in Hamilton County. Nor
do they include the estimated $750 million it will take to replace the I-71/i-
75 Brent Spence Bridge.

"it's going to be a lot more expensive than that when all is said and done,"
said Hamilton County Commissioner John Dowlin, one of the four no
votes.

OKI's board consists of 105 business and community leaders from
throughout the Tristate, including representatives from all major political
jurisdictions - with fewer than half of the total members attending
Thursday's meeting.

E-mail jpilcher@enquirer.com



=PTP=============================================

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/10/10/oki10-10-2003.html

CINCINNATI POST
10-10-2003

OKI gives OK to I-75 project

By Bob Driehaus
Post staff reporter

Major interchanges in Cincinnati and nearby suburbs are first in line for
improvements related to the sweeping $1.83 billion long-range plan for
interstate 75 that was overwhelmingly approved by a regional
transportation board on Thursday.

The Ohio-Kentucky-indiana Regional Council of Governments gave final
approval to a plan that, if funded and implemented, would widen the
interstate to at least four lanes between the Ohio River and I-675 in
Dayton and add a fifth lane at choke points.

The plan also calls for a light rail train line to be built parallel to the
highway with frequent stops to accommodate riders' transportation needs.

A project so massive will unfold over decades, but the Ohio Department of
Transportation is already pushing ahead on the first parts of it.

Diana Martin, ODOT transportation planning program administrator, said
her department will seek millions of dollars in the 2004 state budget to
launch engineering and design studies for several parts of the project.
Each study would be launched in the second half of 2004 if funded:

• Brent Spence Bridge: The state wants to reconfigure entrance and exit
ramps connecting the bridge to the highway to improve the flow of traffic
and allow for integration of a future light rail train line and more highway
lanes. Cost of design and engineering: $12 million.

• interchanges at Hopple Street, Mitchell Avenue and interstate 74: in one
fell swoop, three interchanges would be redesigned in a $7 million study.
Details of improving Mitchell and Hopple interchanges have not been
resolved, but the I-74 interchange is tentatively slated to undergo major
changes, including separating local traffic from through traffic. The current
design forces residents to use the highway briefly rather than remaining
on secondary roads. Part of the plan would be to complete the Colerain
Avenue interchange.

• Lockland/Lincoln Heights interchanges: The partial interchange at Davis
Street would be relocated and completed in a nearby location yet to be
determined The Shepherd Lane interchange would be improved. The
reworked interchange represents a reversal of earlier plans that called for
the interchange to be closed. Community outcry helped sway planners'
opinion. Cost for design and engineering: $5.5 million.

ODOT plans to widen sections of I-75 as they come up for scheduled
maintenance. The process will take more than a decade.

in a position paper Martin read into the record, she said a recent study
conducted by consultants showed the combination of a light rail line and
more highway lanes was the best choice for keeping I-75 functional
through 2030.

"This is the region's window of opportunity. I-75 requires reconstruction.
Once completed, we won't be back for another 50 years. With that caveat,
I remain convinced that the combined solution is the correct decision
given the level of information we have at this stage of study," she said.

Engineers prefer the plan endorsed by OKI over a rejected alternative to
widen the highway to six lanes in each direction. They say the new lanes
and open road would lure drivers off secondary roads and onto the
highway until congestion levels returned to current levels.

Ralph B. Grieme, the Northern Kentucky Area Planning Commission's
OKI representative, expressed skepticism that light rail would do any more
to alleviate congestion than a sixth lane in each direction. He asked why a
four-lane highway that is less congested thanks to light rail wouldn't draw
motorists off secondary roads until it, too, became very congested.

Cindy Minter, a traffic engineer who helped craft the highway study, said
after the meeting that the difference was in who uses light rail. Light rail,
she said, would draw motorists off both secondary roads and the highway.

And others who rely on public transportation would also use the line, she
said.

Only three of dozens of OKI board voters rejected the I-75 plan: Hamilton
County Commissioner John Dowlin, Cincinnati City Council Member John
Cranley and Norwood City Council Member MaryAnn Burwinkel.

Dowlin is a longtime light-rail skeptic who opposed the lack of short-term
fixes for the highway, fearing congestion in the next few years will prompt
residents and businesses to leave Hamilton County.

Cranley is concerned Cincinnati's section of the highway would become a
choke point if it remains largely four lanes while sections north of the city
are widened from three lanes to four.

Burwinkel read a statement drawing parallels between the widening/light
rail plan to construction of I-71 and the Norwood Lateral, which she said
damaged the city by razing homes and businesses.

Judi Craig, who oversaw the I-75 project for OKI, said after Thursday's
vote that the plan was less intrusive than other alternatives.

"You don't want six lanes going through Norwood," Craig said. "I think it's
difficult for people to understand the impacts of a system that doesn't exist
in our area."

While the highway widening portion of the plan will follow established
federal funding procedures, finding the nearly $1 billion needed for light
rail will be a novel enterprise for the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit
Authority, which operates Metro, and the Transit Authority of Northern
Kentucky.

Creating and funding the light rail segment will largely be in the hands of
those two transit authorities, Craig said.

Metro is in no hurry to dive back into light rail after voters rejected by a 2-
to-1 margin a proposed Hamilton County sales tax hike in November 2002
that would have funded a countywide system.

Sallie Hilvers, Metro spokeswoman, said the issue has not been on the
SORTA board's agenda.

"The voters spoke clearly. Our board hasn't discussed it in any detail, and
there are no plans at this point," she said.

SORTA's board will take on a new look with the appointment this week of
two new members who have strong anti-rail credentials: Stephan Louis,
head of Southwestern Ohio Regional Drivers Alliance, which provided the
only organized opposition to the 2002 light-rail initiative, and Daniel
Peters, president of the Buckeye institute, a conservative think tank. Both
were appointed by Hamilton County and could take their seats on the
board as soon as next month, Hilvers said..

TANK and its board have been supportive of light rail, said Gina Douthat,
spokeswoman, but it faces the same mystery of how to fund any portion
of the line, which would run to Twelfth Street in Covington.

" We certainly are in support of the package. I think that funding is what
stands in the way of moving forward with any futuristic transit," Douthat
said.

She said the logical place for the issue to be addressed is at the next joint
committee meeting among the two transit authorities. But Hilvers said she
was not aware that any such meeting between the two boards is
scheduled.



=PTP=============================================

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/10/01/cong100103.html

Cincinnati Post
10-01-2003

Traffic up tenfold since '82

By Bob Driehaus
Post staff reporter

Traffic congestion has grown far more rapidly than the population in
Greater Cincinnati during the past two decades.
Commuters now spend 10 times as long sitting in traffic as they did 20
years ago, and the cost of all that wasted gasoline and lost productivity
has grown to $525 million a year, according to a new study released
Tuesday by the Texas Transportation institute, an affiliate of Texas A&M
University.

Population for the metropolitan area grew by just 21 percent from 1980-
2000, from 1.62 million people to 1.96 million, while traffic increased
tenfold from 1982-2001.

 Ranked 27th
 •  Greater Cincinnati has the worst traffic congestion among the region's
cities, ranking 27th nationally.
•  indianapolis ranked 28th, Columbus 36th, Louisville 38th and Cleveland
41st.



in 1982, according to the study, local commuters spent two hours sitting in
traffic, while in 2001 that figure had grown to 20 hours.

The solution locally and for every other congested U.S. city, researchers
concluded, is finding the right mix of traffic management alternatives
among five categories:

•  Mass transit, such as buses or light rail.

•  Bus and carpool lanes.

•  Traffic signal coordination.

•  Efficient clearing of crashed and disabled vehicles from freeways.

 •  Use of freeway entrance ramp signals to control traffic flow.

"This year's study reinforces our belief that the best solution is actually a
combination of solutions. Each city needs its own bag of tricks to address
this growing problem," said Tim Lomax, one of the study's researchers.

Traffic is worsening throughout the country, according to the Texas report.
The average rush-hour driver wasted more than two full days -- about 51
hours -- sitting in traffic in 2001. That's an increase of four hours in the last
five years.

The total price tag: $69.5 billion in wasted time and gas, the study said.

Researchers said congestion nationally would be far worse without
existing public transportation and traffic management strategies like high-
speed lanes.

"The annual effect of eliminating public transportation service in all 75
cities, while hopefully not a realistic alternative, would have the effect of
adding the equivalent of 1 billion hours of annual travel time," the study
said.

The study was released one day after an Ohio-Kentucky-indiana Regional
Council of Governments committee voted overwhelmingly to recommend
a mix of more lanes and the addition of light rail to keeping traffic moving
on I-75 through 2030. The OKI panel said a combination of light-rail train
service, to run parallel to interstate 75 between the Ohio River and I-675
in Dayton, and widening of the highway to four and five lanes offered the
best hope for the heavily traveled highway.

The plan for I-75 is estimated to cost $1.83 billion, not taking into account
inflation, and would take 15 to 20 years to complete.

it faces myriad hurdles, including a vote by the full OKI board, public
hearings and financing challenges before it can become reality.

Allen Freeman, OKI spokesman, said Tuesday Greater Cincinnati must
turn to a variety of solutions to solve its growing congestion problem.

"We do need to focus on the issue of public transportation to make sure
commuters have options. If we had a good mix of transit and commuter
options, then we'd be in great shape," he said.

"I think we have to look at all of the options. A number of our major
arteries are going to require additional lanes, but I think we need to look at
all of the options, and not preclude any option to try to improve our
system.''

Freeman cited continuing efforts to improve the system, including
upgrading the ARTIMIS system that uses a series of cameras and
electronic message signs to keep motorists apprised of accidents, traffic
jams and other problems.

Glen Brand, the Sierra Club's Midwest representative, touted the Texas
study as further proof of the need for Greater Cincinnati to embrace light
rail service and institute land-use planning that coordinates new
development with access to bus lines and existing infrastructure.

David Braun, who will become general manager of the Transit Authority of
Northern Kentucky on Oct. 20, returns to Greater Cincinnati after a stint in
Peoria, ill., as general manager of that area's transit authority.

He agreed that a combination of solutions is necessary to reduce traffic
congestion. "Reducing congestion requires more than just building roads.
It's the combination of mass transit, better land use planning, trying to
build facilities and homes accessible to mass transit, and convenient bike
and pedestrian paths," he said.

His impression of Greater Cincinnati's traffic?

"it's not as awful as many of the larger cities are, but certainly I think it has
the potential of becoming awful," Braun said.


=PTP=============================================

Cincinnati Enquirer
Tuesday, September 30, 2003

$1.8 billion I-75 fix proposed

Plan includes more lanes, light rail

By James Pilcher


The committee overseeing a study of what to do about interstate 75
Monday overwhelmingly approved a combination of widening the
expressway in southwest Ohio and a new light-rail line from Covington to
West Chester.

The fix will cost an estimated $1.83 billion, but is supposed to eliminate
major rush hour traffic tie-ups 30 years from now.

Finishing up a three-year, $6 million study, the committee voted 27-1 for
the mix, which calls for four lanes in each direction and some areas
getting a fifth lane to reduce congestion. The light-rail system would offer
trains every three minutes during rush hour.

Four members, including the city of Cincinnati's two representatives,
abstained. The lone dissenting vote was Hamilton County Commissioner
John Dowlin.

The recommendation now goes to the full board of the Ohio-Kentucky-
indiana Regional Council of Governments, the area's regional
transportation planning agency. That board must approve the proposal as
part of the region's long-term transportation plan before any of the
recommendations can get federal funding.

The OKI board meets on Oct. 9 and could vote to adopt the
recommendations.

"This three years has been the hardest work I've ever done in one of
these, and I've been on a lot of committees and studies," said committee
chairman Sterling Uhler, a former Fairfield mayor and councilman.

The I-75 fix, with estimated costs in 2003 dollars, would require 23 acres -
much less than other wider highway options that were considered. An
exact cost breakdown was not yet available, but the light-rail line would be
just under $1 billion and the highway expansion would make up the rest.

The highway portion of the proposal could take 10 to 15 years to design
and build, if and when the funding is located. Officials said it would take
another study to pinpoint which areas would get an additional fifth lane.

A light-rail line would take as long or longer to fund and construct, given
Hamilton County voters' strong rejection last fall of a sales tax hike that
would have helped pay for a countywide system.

The recommended option was the only one of two that would remove
traffic jams at rush hour in 30 years, the study found.

The other was widening the highway alone to six lanes in each direction in
Hamilton County and five in Butler and Warren counties. But the highway-
only option was estimated to cost $1.6 billion, and it would have created
major disruptions. Officials estimated that they would have needed to
acquire and clear 160 acres and 103 structures to make way for such an
expansion.

The costs do not include $482 million Ohio is already planning to spend
on improving the design of I-75, which does not meet federal safety
design standards in many sections. They also do not include a potential
replacement of the Brent Spence Bridge, which could cost as much as
$750 million.

Cincinnati Councilman John Cranley said the city abstained because it did
not want to be limited to four lanes or even five in areas that carry more
traffic, especially the stretch of the interstate between the Ohio River and
i-74, which is already four lanes.

"I want to make sure that I discuss this with all of council and that we are
not putting ourselves at a disadvantage," said Cranley.

Some members of the committee complained that they did not get enough
data to make a fair comparison, including the Sierra Club's Glen Brand,
who also abstained.

"But the good news is that OKI continues to see that any solution for the
region's transportation problems must include passenger rail," Brand said.

Dowlin raised several concerns about light rail, citing data released by
anti-light rail proponent Stephan Louis Monday that questioned points in
the study. Dowlin also said more consideration should have been given to
a potential I-75 truck ban, adding that no short-term solutions were
offered.

Louis, whose release was strongly disputed by study consultants, said the
decision to press for light rail was "disappointing."

"They keep having this irrational pull toward the carrot that the federal
government keeps holding out for these pork projects," said Louis, who
led the campaign to defeat the light-rail tax.

Uhler defended the study, but conceded that OKI now has a difficult task
in fitting the proposal into the overall needs of the region.

"I think this is the best solution to a very difficult problem," Uhler said.
"Maybe this thing will hold up for 25 years."

---

E-mail jpilcher@enquirer.com



=PTP============================================

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-
surround9oct09,1,285210.story?coll=la-headlines-california

Los Angeles Times
October 9, 2003

New Gateway Will Close the Door on Stadium, Gym

A science and math building, the backbone of a planned entry linked to a
subway station, will replace the historic facilities.

By Bob Pool
Times Staff Writer

The old gal has faced more makeovers than a plastic surgeon.

Now there's a new wrinkle for Los Angeles City College, the venerable
East Hollywood campus that keeps trying to blend the old with the new.

The school started out in 1914 as a teachers college mimicking the
Eastern-school look with ivy-covered Italian-style buildings arranged
around a formal plaza.

in 1919 it morphed into a four-year, full-service university that was the
forerunner of UCLA. It was converted into Los Angeles' first two-year
junior college in 1929. During the next decade, it was dotted with boxy
concrete classroom buildings constructed by Depression-era WPA work
crews.

During the 1950s and '60s, it took on a modern look as buildings were
constructed in a sleek, international style. For a time, the junior college
shared classrooms with a four-year college being organized there as the
predecessor to what today is Cal State L.A.

And now LACC is being reshaped again — this time to take advantage of
the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's subway system.

College administrators plan to close the original athletic field and football
stadium next month, turning that space into a temporary parking lot.
Eventually, historic Snyder Field will be the site of a high-tech science and
math building and will serve as the backbone of a new park-like gateway
to the college itself.

The landscaped entryway will directly link the center of the 48-acre
campus to the subway station at Vermont Avenue and Santa Monica
Boulevard.

As part of the $147-million redesign, a new track, athletic field and
gymnasium will be built on the opposite side of campus. The new gym will
replace a circa-1933 fieldhouse next to Snyder Field that is also targeted
for demolition.

School officials welcome the changes. They say the new entryway will
improve public accessibility and make the campus more inviting. The gym
and four other new buildings that are part of the redesign will also
enhance the instructional program, according to administrators.

But some LACC alumni who were involved in school sports during the
college's heyday as a state and national powerhouse in football, baseball
and basketball oppose the demolition.

They contend that Snyder Field and the old gym should be preserved and
used for community recreation in a crowded part of town that is in dire
need of public sports space.

"Using that field for parking is ridiculous. It's such a beautiful facility," said
baseball great Don Buford, who played football at LACC before attending
USC and beginning a big league career that led him to the World Series
with the Baltimore Orioles in 1969, '70 and '71. Buford, of Sherman Oaks,
is now involved with player development for the Orioles.

Duke Russell, who signed with the Brooklyn Dodgers after playing
baseball at LACC in 1946, blames the pending demise of Snyder Field
and the gym on a controversial lease of the last vacant land on the
campus for a private golf driving range.

The nearly completed range, surrounded by a 160-foot-tall fence that
towers over the rest of the campus, was approved by the Los Angeles
Community College District before voters passed a $1.24-billion bond
issue that is paying for the new classroom construction. At the time,
officials said they needed the $120,000 a year in rent that the range
owner is paying.

"The land being used for the driving range is where the college should put
new parking and new classrooms," said Russell, of Hollywood. He said
the college should preserve its "historic athletic facilities" for use by the
public.

Former sports agent Dennis Gilbert agrees. He was an LACC student in
the mid-1960s before becoming famous for negotiating Barry Bonds'
$43.2-million contract with the San Francisco Giants.

Gilbert, of Hidden Hills, said college officials didn't look for alternative
funding sources before signing the golf range deal or before reducing
LACC's athletics program as part of a budget cutback. Eight sports — half
of last year's program — were eliminated this year. The football program
was dropped earlier.

"If they really cared, they'd try to put together a fund-raiser and try to find
a way to keep sports," said Gilbert — a Chicago White Sox executive and
member of a group exploring the purchase of the Los Angeles Dodgers.
"The income they'll receive from this private developer could probably
have been raised if they reached out to alumni like myself."

Some college officials have said that, in retrospect, they wish the driving
range deal had not been signed. But the 10-year lease, renewable for up
to 35 years, was approved in 1999, before 2001's Proposition A bond
issue was passed.

Campus administrators said Snyder Field — named after William H.
Snyder, the founding director of Los Angeles Junior College in 1929 —
must be closed and used for parking now even though new replacement
athletic facilities won't be built for several years.

"This field is used constantly for physical education classes, soccer
classes, the public. We're wondering what we're going to do for the
training of athletes," said Glenn Johnson, an assistant track and field
coach at LACC.

Monica Navarro is a 20-year-old sophomore psychology student who was
working out on the field this week. "I wish there was a way to keep it — at
least until we have a new one," she said.

LACC basketball coach Mike Miller said the gymnasium is believed to be
the oldest community college gym in the state. Its gleaming oak
hardboards are the original 1933 flooring. The building will be demolished
when the new gym is finished in about 2006, said Miller, the college's
athletic director.

"it's a tremendous, very functional gym, a borderline historic building," he
said. "We had a 50th-anniversary reunion for members of the 1949 and
'50 national championship teams here in the gym. Those old men were
teary-eyed when they saw this place."

The only other major structure slated for demolition is a 1937 chemistry
building. Often used as a movie backdrop, the WPA-built Streamline
Moderne structure is filled with antique cabinets, doors and fixtures.
Chemistry students and staff members have not been told where they will
be relocated until a new classroom building is finished in about three
years, said chemistry professor Bjorn Landberg and lab technician Al
Germaine.

The inconvenience that will come with the campus face lift will be worth it,
predicted newly appointed LACC President Doris Pichon Givens. The new
tree-shaded campus gateway at the subway station will be particularly
welcome, she said. It will eliminate a two-block walk to the current
entrance.

"Beauty enhances. People will be more aware of where we are and that
they can use the subway to come here," Givens said. "it's going to look
nice and help the environment."



=PTP===========================================

Sacramento Bee
Tuesday, October 7, 2003


'indirect pollution' fees sought for valley


By Mark Grossi
The Fresno Bee


in the San Joaquin Valley, the nation's second-dirtiest air basin,
the time has arrived to face a subtle but growing pollution source --
vehicle emissions connected with sprawling city developments.


Expect this some day soon: Home buyers will pay higher prices in new
neighborhoods at the city's edge to compensate for pollution they
generate when they drive to stores, jobs and other places.


Far-flung suburbs are not the only targets. Trucking distribution
centers, commercial buildings, industrial complexes and shopping
malls also are considered "indirect pollution sources" because of
vehicle traffic in and out of the areas.


Vehicle pollution is the No. 1 contributor to bad air in the valley.
Motorists drive more than 80 million miles daily, and the valley has
one of the fastest-growing populations in the state.


This week, air officials will begin making a new rule aimed at
developments that create vehicle pollution. The rule would charge
fees to raise millions, which could be used to pay for cleanup
projects ranging from upgrades on farm diesel irrigation pumps to
compressed-natural-gas bus fleets in cities.


Environmentalists believe the rule is one of the most important steps
for the valley's air cleanup.


"Everybody has to pay for cleaner air," says Sierra Club member
Arthur Unger of Bakersfield.


But how much should people pay? How should the money be spent? Who
would supervise this money? The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District hopes to have the answers to those questions by July
2004, when the governing board is expected to vote on the new rule.


Meetings are planned this week in Modesto, Fresno and Bakersfield to
unveil initial ideas and to hear opinions from the public, air
district officials say.


Twelve years ago, the building industry opposed such fees when an
early proposal quoted more than $5,000 for a single-family home and
more than $1 million for a 30,000-square-foot supermarket.


The rule went no further.


There is no wiggle room this time: Senate Bill 709, written by state
Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, requires the fees.


The district's cleanup blueprint for particle pollution also contains
a provision for the rule.


The building industry is not raising objections. Jeff Harris,
president of the Building industry Association of the San Joaquin
Valley, says the industry wants to be sure the fees are equitable and
fairly applied.


"It will probably have the biggest impact on retail services," he
says. "The impact would probably be minimal in larger cities like
Fresno or Bakersfield. But in smaller, poorer rural communities,
there might be a chilling effect on development.


"The fee could make the difference between building a project and not
building it in rural communities."


The fees are not unprecedented. Stockton and Turlock require a
payment in the $150 range for such fees, says district planning
manager Dave Mitchell. He says he doesn't know yet what the district
fee should be.


"The idea is to have all cities on a level playing field," Mitchell
says.


The most influential fee precedent might have been set three months
ago in Bakersfield. A developer agreed to settle a Sierra Club
lawsuit by paying $1,200 per home as an air pollution fee for a
subdivision with more than 300 houses.


Though the settlement is private, the city of Bakersfield and the air
district will be included in a committee to supervise the fee money.
The developer, the Sierra Club and the Center for Race, Poverty and
the Environment also will be on the committee.


The money -- amounting to more than $375,000 when the development is
complete -- would be used on pollution reduction projects, such as
converting public fleets of older diesel vehicles to natural gas.


The developer who agreed to the fee says it made good economic sense
for him to settle the case.


The air district's fees could be structured to encourage building in
the core of cities, a concept known as infill.


Air planning manager Mitchell says it might be possible to give
credits to or eliminate the fee for developers who build in preferred
areas.


He says about 20,000 homes are built each year in the valley.


if the air fee were $1,000 per house, a $20 million war chest would
be built to fight air pollution.


Mitchell emphasizes that the money could be spent on only the most
efficient cleanup projects, meaning the ones that remove the most
pollution for the least amount of money.


Fees should go to the air district and come right back to the cities
where the money was paid, says Sierra Club member Kevin Hall of
Fresno.






PTP Digest 2003/10/09-A = CONTENTS

* Houston: Rail opponents 'gaining momentum'
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 8, 2003

* Houston Metro guides LRT-area real estate development
   Houston Business Journal - October 6, 2003

* Trenton: Light DMU project needs start date, name
   The Times - Trenton Thursday, October 09, 2003

* Cincinnati: No easy fix for I-75 mess, LRT needed
   Cincinnati Enquirer Thursday, October 9, 2003

* Cincinnati: City regional rep may balk at Council on LRT
   Cincinnati Post 10-09-2003

* Cincinnati City Council 'iffy' on I-75 LRT plan
   Cincinnati Post 10-07-2003

* Denver: LRT plan for suburbs 'back on track'
   Denver Post Wednesday, October 08, 2003

* Denver: City eyes streetcar revival
   Denver Post Thursday, October 09, 2003

* Seattle monorail agency becoming Big Brother?
   Seattle Times Thursday, October 09, 2003

* Charlotte struggling for federal LRT funding
   Charlotte Observer Wednesday, Oct 08, 2003


=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 8, 2003

Opponents of rail plan appear to be gaining momentum

By LUCAS WALL


With proponents of light rail falling short of their fund-raising goal and
opponents bombarding voters with anti-Metro advertising, the campaign
dynamic might be shifting toward those who favor more highways,
observers of the ongoing shootout say.

Voters will rule on a $4.6 billion Metropolitan Transit Authority expansion
proposal next month that includes a $640 million bond issue to accelerate
construction of the next 22 miles of light rail.

Texans for True Mobility wants voters to kill Metro's plan, arguing in a
four-page color ad arriving in mailboxes this week that "congestion is our
real problem, and Metro's plan does not address congestion."

Citizens for Public Transportation, the committee pushing for approval of
the mass transit proposal, has yet to start its advertising. In campaign
finance statements filed earlier this week and in prior months, it reported
raising a total of $772,057 as of Sept. 25. That's about half of the goal its
leader, developer Ed Wulfe, has set.

Paul Mabry, the committee's spokesman, said fund raising has been
difficult because of constant wrangling over what the plan should include
and persistent attacks by rail foes such as U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-
Houston, and Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt.

But, Mabry said, now that the plan's details are settled and the election is
nearing, he expects the pace of donations will pick up.

"There's been extraordinary circumstances surrounding this campaign,"
he said. "For prudent reasons, people have wanted to wait to fulfill their
pledges until they saw what the final plan was going to be."

The plan voters will decide Nov. 4 includes money for 40 miles of light rail,
44 new bus routes, more HOV lanes and local street construction, all by
2025 and without a tax increase.

Metro says it has spent $1.5 million in taxpayer money to "educate" voters
about the referendum. It has run ads promoting the benefits of light rail
and other elements of its plan, but is prohibited by law from advocating for
approval.

Texans for True Mobility has not filed campaign finance disclosures,
contending that its political action committee had not raised or spent
money by the Sept. 25 deadline. Instead, its nonprofit educational
foundation has been collecting donations and paying for the first ad blitz.

The organization refused Wednesday a request by the Houston Chronicle
to voluntarily release its contributions and expenditures to date.

"Clearly this is an educational, privately funded entity whose members are
free to contribute and have like-minded opinions on the way government
should be run and not be open to any vilification," said spokesman Chris
Begala. "The First Amendment and the Supreme Court guarantee our
right to have privacy."

Groups that use so-called "soft money" -- funds not subject to public
disclosure -- are controversial but permitted so long as they don't urge a
vote for or against a candidate or ballot measure.

Bob Stein, a Rice University political scientist, said that while academics
and journalists decry the practice, most voters don't pay attention.

"What matters in this election is who can deliver their message, get it out
and be convincing," Stein said.

Though last month's Chronicle/KHOU-Channel 11 poll showed 2-to-1
support among decided voters for Metro's plan, Stein said the intense
opposition that's blooming probably will narrow that gap. Stein conducted
the poll with Richard Murray, director of the University of Houston's Center
for Public Policy.

"This could be a close race, a very close race," Stein said.

Murray concurred.

"Studies of referendums show that all you have to do to get a 'no' vote is
raise doubt about what's being proposed and so there's a higher burden
or standard that the proponents generally have to meet," Murray said. "So
the fact that there is a well-funded opposition would generally bode ill for
passing this deal."

But, he added, "almost everyone in the community is interested in traffic
and mobility issues and most already have strong opinions about rail."

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2146479



=PTP==============================================

http://houston.bizjournals.com/houston/stories/2003/10/06/story2.html

Houston Business Journal - October 6, 2003

EXCLUSIVE REPORTS

Metro rides into real estate development

Nancy Sarnoff
Houston Business Journal

in a new initiative intended to spur economic development along the light
rail line, the Metropolitan Transit Authority has been quietly acquiring
tracts of real estate along the future transit corridor.

in the next 60 to 90 days, Metro will issue a request for proposals to
developers interested in partnering with the transit agency on the
redevelopment of a site near the Midtown passenger rail station at Main
Street and Wheeler.

What sort of equity position Metro will take in the potential real estate
development is still unclear.

Steve Bonczek, who was hired by Metro last year to promote transit-
oriented development, says the purpose of the new initiative is to
generate additional funds for Metro and increase ridership.

"Part of our focus and mission is to stimulate economic development,"
Bonczek says. "Metro will share in some of the net proceeds."

But Metro's foray into speculative real estate investment is being
questioned in some real estate quarters, and catching flak from at least
one public official.

Houston City Councilman and former mayoral candidate Michael Berry
says Metro's main priority should be moving people and relieving
congestion, not participating in economic development.

"They would rather do development deals and build a rail line regardless
of how many people ride it and how much it costs," Berry says. "With their
pot of money, they're supposed to be moving people. These are
transportation dollars, pure and simple."

Bonczek responds by pointing out that Federal Transit Administration
guidelines encourage joint development projects, and that these types of
public/private partnerships are common in other cities around the country.

The Wheeler Station is a key transit stop for Metro.

in addition to occupying the center position on the 7.5-mile line now under
construction, the site will also serve as a transitional hub for buses as well
as rail.

Bonczek says that none of the land was acquired by condemnation. It was
all purchased in voluntary transactions.

He says Metro paid between $20 and $30 per square foot for the dirt -- or
an average of $7.3 million for the entire 6.7 acres acquired.

Thinking inside the tank
Metro is getting some assistance from the Houston chapter of the Urban
Land institute, a Washington, D.C.-based real estate think tank.

This week, Metro and the ULI hosted a one-day program that focused on
the Wheeler station land as a site for a mixed-use, transit-oriented
development.

The "Technical Assistance Program" gave a panel of ULI members the
opportunity to offer recommendations in the areas of design, development
and community redevelopment.

Participants included Kevin Batchelor of The Hanover Co., Neil Tofsky of
Senterra Real Estate Group and irving Phillips, a prominent Houston
architect.

Bonczek says the panel's recommendations will help guide Metro in
formulating the request for proposals for development of the site.

The ULI panel was led by Zane Segal, the group's vice chair for advisory
services.

Segal says the Wheeler station is being studied because it has less
surrounding development compared to many of the other rail stops.

One of the biggest challenges for urban developers, Segal says, is
amassing enough land for construction of a mixed-use real estate project.

"The act of blocking up developable land is the one thing private
developers can't do," Segal says. "it's one of the most important jobs of
governmental entities."

Plus, much of the land Metro acquired was necessary for development of
the Wheeler transit station as a transition hub.

"A lot of the land they bought, they had to buy," says Segal. "The question
is: What do they do with it, and do they buy more land for the
development of a successful mixed-use project?"

While some critics argue that Metro should focus solely on transit issues,
advocates of the new initiative say assisting in economic development
along rail lines plays an important role in improving mobility.

Says Segal: "The effect of a transit-oriented development is that it
increases transit ridership, which reduces congestion, improves air quality
and overall quality of life."

nsarnoff@bizjournals.com • 713-960-5931



=PTP==========================================

http://www.nj.com/news/times/mercer/index.ssf?/base/news-
8/106568867440311.xml

The Times - Trenton
Thursday, October 09, 2003

Mercer County

Agency expects to set date for opening of light-rail line

By TOM HESTER JR.


NJ Transit officials yesterday said they hope to announce in November a
starting date and new name for the Southern New Jersey Light Rail
Transit System.

The agency has said the Trenton-to-Camden system would begin running
in the fall, but hasn't announced a starting date yet for the line that has
been under construction since May 2000.

NJ Transit spokeswoman Penny Bassett Hackett said the agency's
executive director, George Warrington, said the contractor is expected to
have finished 90 percent of the line's testing by NJ Transit's next board
meeting, scheduled for Nov. 12.

She said Warrington expects to announce a starting date and the line's
new name during that meeting.

Testing, Hackett said, is now about 60 percent complete.

The Greater Mercer Transportation Management Association called the
system the River Run in its fall 2003 newsletter, but Hackett said, "We will
announce the name of the line when we announce the starting date."

She said NJ Transit is waiting to announce both at the same time as part
of "a comprehensive marketing plan and roll out."

Sandra Brillhart, executive director of the Greater Mercer TMA, couldn't be
reached for comment yesterday.

initial predications called for work to be finished in 2002.

The line will feature diesel-powered, trolley-like trains stopping at 20
stations from Camden to the Trenton Train Station. It will operate daily
from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.

Once financing costs are included, the project is expected to cost more
than $1 billion, or $73 million per year in debt and operating costs.

While the project has been criticized as unnecessary and a waste of vital
transit dollars, supporters say it will spark an economic development
boom along its route and provide a much-needed service from South
Jersey to New York City through the Trenton Train Station.

NJ Transit plans to charge riders $1.10 for a one-way fare on the system.
Projections have the line attracting about 6,000 riders per day, or 3,000
round-trip passengers.

Trains on the line have derailed five times during testing. All the
derailments occurred in rail yards.




=PTP==========================================

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2003/10/09/loc_75analysis09.html

The Cincinnati Enquirer
Thursday, October 9, 2003

i-75: No easy fix to woes

Traffic options limited

By James Pilcher


You're sitting in your car in stalled interstate 75 traffic in the Lockland
canyon.

Adding a lane to the expressway and building a light-rail line, which the
region's transportation planners could approve today, won't help you this
morning. In fact, it won't help you until the middle of the next decade. And
the fix will cost $1.83 billion in tax dollars.

So you sit there. Thinking. "is that all there is?

"Why don't they spend that money to build a new bypass of the region?
Why don't they just double-deck the expressway, to add capacity without
having to flatten neighborhoods such as Lockland? Can't they just ban
truck traffic inside I-275? Why can't we have a high-occupancy vehicle
lane, as they do in other cities?"

in fact, those involved with the three-year, $6 million study that came up
with the highway/light-rail option considered those strategies, which have
been used with mixed success elsewhere.

in the end, the study came up with widening the highway to four lanes
throughout Hamilton, Warren and Butler counties, and to five lanes in
some spots, as well as a new light-rail line. This plan is up for approval
today by the board of the Ohio-Kentucky-indiana Regional Council of
Governments.

OKI approval - necessary for federal funding - will be the last major step of
the study of the outdated, overcrowded expressway. Following are four of
the more than 20 alternatives that were discussed and rejected.

When the study began in the fall of 2000, a bypass around both Dayton
and Greater Cincinnati to either the east or the west was one of the first
ideas floated. It was also one of the first to be axed.

While proponents of such a plan say it would be cheaper to build a new
road through mostly uninhabited farmland than rebuilding and expanding
an urban interstate, planners and engineers say that isn't the case.

Building the new concrete and asphalt would be cheaper in such areas.
But the land acquisition costs would be astronomical, however, even if it
were farmland.

A bypass wouldn't help much during rush hour, when I-75's problems are
worst. Local commuters, not truckers and travelers passing through the
region, make up the bulk of rush-hour drivers.

Another recurring idea has been to build a double-deck highway above
the existing throughway for at least part, if not all, the stretch of I-75 from
the Ohio River to I-275.

The thinking: No new land would need to be taken, yet it would at least
double the capacity of the highway, because the bottom lanes could then
be made reversible during rush hour.

But this concept was ruled out early for one reason: cost. One estimate for
what would essentially be a 12-mile bridge from the river to the bypass
was $20 billion. And that didn't include redesigning all the interchanges or
regrading the existing highway

One of the most controversial proposals has been banning large trucks
from the interstate inside the I-275 loop, at least during rush hour. The
argument: Since one truck takes up the space of five cars, capacity would
skyrocket.

Yet such a ban would cause major problems for law enforcement.

Shippers would suffer, a concern since Greater Cincinnati has become a
major transportation hub.

The idea of a ban has created a major debate at OKI, with rural
representatives opposed because trucks would end up on I-275 in their
areas. Planners also cautioned more trucks on I-275 and other roads
means more damage to them.

The last concept most frequently mentioned by commuters and members
of the study committee has been high-occupancy vehicle lanes. HOV
lanes are reserved for vehicles carrying two or more passengers.

in theory, such lanes would encourage carpooling. But apart from a few
cities, such as Washington, D.C., HOV lanes fail two ways. One example
is Atlanta, where commuters are squeezed into the remaining lanes. In
other cities, the new lane goes unused if traffic does not reach a critical
mass, which can take years in smaller- to medium-sized cities.

So after all that, and after deciding which exits needed to be reconfigured,
the committee was left between widening the existing highway, a new
light-rail system, or a combination of both .

E-mail jpilcher@enquirer.com.



=PTP=========================================

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/10/09/hiway100903.html


Cincinnati Post
10-09-2003

OKI rep may not vote wish of Council

By Kevin Osborne
Post staff reporter

Despite pressure Wednesday from fellow City Council members, John
Cranley remained determined to oppose a proposal to improve interstate
75 by adding more lanes and light rail train service.

Cranley is one of two council members representing the city on the Ohio-
Kentucky-indiana Regional Council of Government's board which votes
today on incorporating the $1.83 billion proposal into the region's long-
range transportation plan.

Mayor Charlie Luken had pressed for a City Council vote on the issue
before OKI's decision, and Council voted 6-3 in support Wednesday.

Jim Tarbell, the other council member who sits on OKI's board, was part
of the Council majority in support Wednesday.

Cranley voted with Council Members Pat DeWine and Chris Monzel to
oppose the plan.

After Council made its decision, Tarbell asked Cranley if he would support
the plan during OKI's vote. "When you have a two-thirds majority of
Council supporting this, I think it's important to reflect that."

Cranley disagreed, adding he would oppose the plan today.

"We are appointed by this committee to vote our conscience," Cranley
said.

Luken, who had sought City Council's guidance and also opposes the I-75
proposal, defended Cranley's stance. "I don't think anybody's constrained
by Council's vote."

Some on Council, though, chided Cranley for inconsistency. In the past,
he has criticized how the city's appointees to other boards -- notably the
Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority -- haven't followed Council
policy directives.

in February, Cranley sent letters to Council's two appointees on the
CMHA board, criticizing them for taking a stance on an issue contrary to
Council's, and asked them to resign.

"It seems you are representing the will of CMHA and not the city's,"
Cranley wrote in identical letters to the two women. "It is regrettable that
you have refused to commit to vote with the unanimous will of council and
the mayor -- the very people that appointed you to be the city's
representatives."

Despite his opposition, Cranley predicted OKI would approve the
proposal.

"My intelligence on this issue suggests to me that the vote (today) will be
overwhelming for this," Cranley said.

OKI's long-range transportation plan sets the region's priorities for the next
30 years, but inclusion in it doesn't necessarily mean the project will
secure the necessary funding to get done.

Several Council members said the city should endorse the proposal.

"it's time for the city to go on record in support of light rail," said David
Crowley.

"We have to have a plan," said Minette Cooper. "Unless we vote and do
what we need to do now, we cannot anticipate moving in this city 30 years
from now."

Luken, though, preferred to hedge support. "My own view is it's not hard
and fast. It's exploratory and long-range. I don't think we're irrevocably
committing to any plan involving light rail or any plan involving I-75."

[SIDEBAR]

 Detailed studies up next for I-75 upgrade

 if the proposal to improve interstate 75 traffic flow by adding lanes and
building a light rail system is approved today, next up will be more detailed
engineering and environmental-impact studies.

First segments built probably would be improvements to several current
choke points, including the interchanges with Cincinnati's Hopple Street,
Mitchell Avenue and interstate 74, and the Lockland interchange, said
Diana Martin, Ohio Department of Transportation planning program
administrator.

No determination has been made on where a light rail system, or its
stations, would be, although the most frequently mentioned route is along
existing rail lines.

Today's vote by the 105 members of the board of the Ohio-Kentucky-
indiana Regional Council of Governments follows a 27-1 vote, with four
abstentions, last month by an OKI oversight committee. The city of
Cincinnati abstained then.

The plan affects I-75 between the Ohio River and interstate 675 in
Dayton.

Most of the highway between the river and I-675 is three lanes, though
large stretches are wider, including the entire segment between the river
and I-74.

Reservations to the plan have been expressed by some, including the city
of St. Bernard, which stands to lose its current firehouse and post office,
as well as numerous homes' back yards, should the highway be widened
to the east.

Hamilton County Commissioner John Dowlin opposed the plan, citing
concern over its cost as well as a lack of short-term fixes for the highway.


=PTP==========================================

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/10/07/high100703.html

Cincinnati Post
10-07-2003

City Council iffy on I-75 plan

By Kevin Osborne
Post staff reporter

Although a Cincinnati City Council majority appears to support a plan for
improving interstate 75 by integrating light rail train service with more
highway lanes, two city officials who get to vote on the regional plan likely
will cancel each other out.

City Council Member Jim Tarbell generally supports the $1.83 billion plan,
while City Council Member John Cranley has serious reservations.

Tarbell and Cranley are among the more than 70 area officials who
comprise the Ohio-Kentucky-indiana Regional Council of Government's
board of trustees.

OKI's board will vote Thursday whether to include the I-75 proposal into
the region's long-range transportation plan.

The list sets the region's transportation priorities for the next 30 years, but
inclusion on it doesn't necessarily mean the project will secure the
necessary state and federal funding to become a reality.

"There's no question we're going to do something," Tarbell said about
expanding I-75. "We've got to make it possible for people to get here."

But Cranley is worried that adding lanes to I-75 in Butler and Warren
counties without adding lanes through Cincinnati will increase traffic
congestion in the urban core.

And he notes that there is not broad support for adding light rail.

"This community is a long way from approving a local (funding) match to
make light rail possible," Cranley said. "I don't think it's going to happen
anytime soon."

After a long debate, City Council's community development committee
recommended Monday that OKI support the lane-widening-light rail
combination endorsed last month by an OKI panel.

"We're not talking about financing in here, we're talking about concept,"
said City Council Member David Crowley.

"I have no problem saying we've got to move to light rail in the future,"
Crowley added.

City Council's action doesn't bind how Cranley votes Thursday.

in the past, however, Cranley has criticized how the city's appointees to
other boards -- notably the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority --
haven't followed Council's policy directives.

Mayor Charlie Luken -- who is uneasy about the light rail component after
Hamilton County voters overwhelmingly rejected a transit sales tax last fall
-- wanted City Council to take a stance before OKI's Thursday vote.

Luken is worried that the I-75 plan will drain limited federal transportation
funding, jeopardizing projects like replacing the Waldvogel Viaduct, which
connects the Sixth Street Expressway at River Road to Elberon and
Warsaw avenues at the base of Price Hill..

"We're not going to do them all," Luken said. "There's not money to do
them all."

Perhaps more than the 197 other communities in the eight-county, three-
state region covered by OKI, Cincinnati will be affected most by whatever
solutions ultimately are chosen to reduce traffic congestion on I-75.

Cincinnati is the only major urban area within the region, and I-75's major
bottleneck occurs at the Brent Spence Bridge over the Ohio River,
adjacent to the city's downtown.

An OKI committee that examined alternatives for improving I-75 said the
combination of adding lanes and using light rail was preferable because
it's cheaper than widening the interstate to six lanes in each direction and
involves less disruption to surrounding communities.

And the proposal would increase capacity on I-75 more than by adding a
lane designated for car-pooling or buses, or by restricting truck traffic
during rush hours, said Fred Craig, an OKI consultant.

"It doesn't get everybody off the interstate, but it gets a number of people
off," Craig said.

Under the proposal, I-75 would be widened to at least four lanes in each
direction between the Ohio River and interstate 675 in Dayton.

At choke points, a fifth lane in each direction would be added.

if the option is incorporated into the 30-year plan, officials will decide
where to put the five-lane sections after additional engineering and
environmental-impact studies.

Most of the highway between the river and I-675 near Dayton is three
lanes, though large stretches are wider, including the entire segment
between the river and I-74.

No determination has been made on where a light rail system, or its
stations, would be located, although the most frequently mentioned route
is along existing rail lines.

Responding to Cranley's criticisms, OKI officials said additional lanes
through Cincinnati are an option being considered as they study how to
replace the Brent Spence Bridge.

"We have to act as a region," Craig said. "We have to look at it as a
continuum of projects done over a long period of time."

David Dawson, a local real estate agent who is part of a city-backed group
trying to boost Cincinnati's homeownership rate, said neighborhoods
along I-75 will suffer if only lane expansion is considered.

By contrast, a light rail system would help boost property values in those
neighborhoods, Dawson said.

"Residential property values do not and will not increase with highway
expansion," he said. "We have to do something with I-75, and it's going to
have to be a combination of highway expansion and mass transit."


[SIDEBAR]

 Timetable
 •  After OKI's board of trustees endorses an I-75 proposal, it still must
clear a variety of governmental regulatory and funding hurdles.
•  The quickest that the intertstate 75 project could be completed is about
15 to 20 years, OKI officials said.


=PTP=============================================

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~1683722,00.html#

Denver Post
Wednesday, October 08, 2003

FasTracks back on track to suburbs

Scaled-back plan ditched; RTD will seek other cuts


By Jeffrey Leib
Denver Post Staff Writer

Bowing to public pressure, RTD said it once again expects to include light-
rail or commuter-rail service to Golden, Longmont and Highlands Ranch in
the FasTracks transit expansion plan it will take to area voters (See map).
But to pay for it, the tradeoff will be fewer rail cars, less frequency of
service, fewer parking spaces at rail stops and a longer construction time.

The Regional Transportation District board will consider the latest plan
next month, and, if approved, it probably would go before voters in
November 2004.

in August, RTD cited sluggish sales-tax receipts as the reason for
slashing nearly $1 billion from FasTracks' price tag by shortening the
length of a number of planned rail lines. The reduction cut the cost of the
10-year transit expansion to about $4.2 billion.

At the time, RTD said it hoped to build the slashed rail extensions at a
later date under a second phase of FasTracks.

But on Tuesday, RTD general manager Cal Marsella told the transit
district's board of directors that public outcry about the rail-line reductions
forced RTD to revisit the issue.

When RTD took the two-phase FasTracks proposal to a series of public
meetings recently, "It was poorly received," Marsella said.

The two-phase plan would have required two votes by residents on a
sales-tax increase - possibly separated by as much as 10 years.

Now, "It does look like we will have the financial capacity to build out the
whole system with one vote," Marsella told directors at Tuesday night's
meeting.

Some mass-transit advocates welcomed RTD's about-face.

"At this point it's positive that they're looking at all the possibilities," said
Lauren Martens, director of the pro-rail Transit Alliance. "They're
responding to what they heard from the public."

The issue that RTD hopes to put before voters in the seven-county
Denver area next year would seek to increase RTD's sales tax to 1
percent from the current 0.6 percent.

The 66 percent tax increase would add about 4 cents to every $10
purchase.

The new cost of FasTracks that voters will be asked to approve will be
"somewhat higher" than the $4.2 billion plan announced in August, "but
not significantly higher," Marsella said Tuesday.

To restore the original end-of- line stations to FasTracks' rail lines while
keeping the price close to August's scaled-back proposal, RTD will reduce
the number of rail cars it buys for the transit expansion, Marsella said.

That, in turn, will reduce the frequency of service, he added. RTD also
plans to save money by not building as many parking spaces at rail stops
as originally planned.

RTD also may save money by extending the FasTracks buildout beyond
the planned 10 years, Marsella said.

The latest plan calls for once again extending the west corridor rail line to
the Jefferson County administration and courts center in Golden,
extending a planned Arvada light-rail line to Ward Road and extending a
Denver-to-Boulder commuter-rail line to Longmont.

it also calls for extending the existing southwest corridor light-rail line from
its current terminus at Mineral Avenue in Littleton to Highlands Ranch.
Additionally, a proposed rail line to north Adams County would be
extended to 160th Avenue from the earlier proposed terminus at 124th
Avenue.

in the cost-reduction plan announced in August, the west line was to
terminate at the Federal Center near U.S. 6 and Union Boulevard in
Lakewood, and the Arvada line was to end in the city's Olde Town area.

The Boulder-to-Longmont rail extension was shelved under the August
plan, as was the Highlands Ranch extension.

Also on Tuesday, a coalition of local government leaders in the U.S. 36
corridor endorsed FasTracks and its plan to build bus rapid transit down
the center of U.S. 36 from Boulder to interstate 25 as well as a parallel
commuter-rail line from Denver's Union Station to Boulder and Longmont.

The group included mayors from Boulder, Louisville, Westminster,
Broomfield and Superior.

Bus rapid transit calls for dedicated highway lanes used by buses and
other high-occupancy vehicles. The U.S. 36 plan calls for bus stations in
the median of the highway

[SIDEBAR]

PARKING LOST

Beginning Saturday, RTD will no longer offer parking for about 170 cars at
the Alameda light-rail station on an unpaved parking lot at the north end of
the station.

The Regional Transportation District said it lost its lease with a private
owner for the dirt lot.

But RTD said it will continue to provide parking at Alameda for 297
vehicles on the paved, RTD- owned lot at the rail station.

The transit agency also has 200 parking spaces available for RTD riders
in the nearby Broadway Marketplace shopping complex.



=PTP==========================================

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~1685788,00.html

Denver Post
Thursday, October 09, 2003

City eyes streetcar revival on Colfax

Plan would be part of revitalization

By Jeffrey Leib
Denver Post Staff Writer

Having grown up in south Denver in the 1940s, Jim Peiker remembers the
pleasures of riding streetcars of the Denver Tramway Co. downtown or to
Lakeside amusement park on the other side of the city.
Now a businessman in Denver's East Colfax Avenue corridor, Peiker and
other neighborhood activists have joined with Denver officials to promote
the return of the streetcar to East Colfax.

"I've been beating the drum on this for 15 years," said Peiker, owner with
his wife and daughter of the Castle Marne bed and breakfast just north of
Colfax on Race Street.

Speaking of the revitalization of Colfax, Peiker said, "The trolley will tie it
all together."

Denver has pledged $50,000 and is seeking another $150,000 in federal
funds from the Denver Regional Council of Governments to study the
possible installation of a streetcar line on Colfax from the state Capitol at
Lincoln Street to Yosemite Street, on Denver's eastern border with Aurora.

Liz Rao, planning director for the Regional Transportation District, said her
agency is monitoring the Colfax streetcar project, but RTD does not have
money to contribute to it right now.

The study will examine the feasibility of replacing RTD's high-volume
Route 15 bus service with streetcars. It will also look into replacing
existing 15 Limited express bus service in the corridor with a "bus rapid
transit," or BRT, system, said Jason Longsdorf, city planner specialist in
Denver's Public Works Department.

in the city's thinking, BRT buses would have front and back doors for
quicker loading and unloading of passengers, only stop at a limited
number of "superstops" along the route, and get a jump on other traffic at
stoplights, Longsdorf said.

BRT buses could speed the trip for commuters in the East Colfax corridor
while streetcars serve passengers taking shorter, more leisurely trips.

Denver's model for bringing back the streetcar is Portland, Ore., said
Katherine Cornwell, senior city planner in Denver's community planning
and development agency.

Portland installed a 5-mile streetcar line separate from the area's light-rail
system. The trolley line has spurred significant economic development in
the streetcar corridor, say Denver officials who have hosted counterparts
from Portland to advise Denver on the potential for a return of trolleys to
East Colfax.

Denver planners aim to bring together "the right zoning tools, transit tools
and economic development tools" to revitalize the Colfax corridor,
Cornwell said.

A streetcar line along East Colfax could help spur $800 million to $1 billion
in residential and commercial development along the corridor, said Dave
Walstrom, executive director of the Colfax Business improvement District,
which has the mission of revitalizing the stretch of Colfax from Broadway
to Colorado Boulevard.

A streetcar line on Colfax, for example, could spur a $200 million
redevelopment of the old Mercy Hospital site just north of Colfax on
Fillmore Street, Walstrom said.

Business owners along Colfax generally are in favor of a trolley line, and
residents in the area "want to study what kind of impact it will have on
residential streets," said Tom Knorr, executive director of Capitol Hill
United Neighborhoods Inc.

Knorr said he is sure a trolley line would be an asset.

"I think it could enliven Colfax Avenue and turn it into a real destination for
retail, restaurants and residential mixed-used development," he said.

Streetcars and other vehicles would share the same lane, under the plan
being considered by Denver.

in Portland, it cost about $11 million a mile to install the city's trolley line
and to acquire cars for the operation, Longsdorf said. Denver would
expect similar costs.

Funding for a Colfax streetcar line could come from a number of sources,
including bond money, federal funds, private investment and possible tax-
increment financing that relies on transit-spurred development to raise
money for the project.



=PTP===============================================

Seattle Times
Thursday, October 09, 2003


Monorail wants names of people evading car tax

By Susan Gilmore
Seattle Times staff reporter


Seattle motorists who try to evade the monorail tax by licensing cars
outside the city, beware: The monorail may be keeping tabs on you.

Monorail officials met privately with car-licensing agents yesterday to
make sure they know they're supposed to report suspected tax evaders to
the state Department of Licensing — which, in turn, is to give the
information to the Seattle Monorail Project.

The monorail hasn't received any names yet, said monorail spokesman
Paul Bergman, "but we know evasion's happening. We've been trying to
get a handle on what level of evasion is going on."

While monorail officials insist that it's illegal for Seattle residents to
register their cars outside the city to avoid the tax, there is no penalty in
the law for doing so. But in a handout distributed to agents yesterday, the
Monorail Project said "vehicle owners who are suspected of seeking to
avoid the tax by registering their vehicle at a place other than their primary
residence may be investigated for tax evasion."

in another handout, the Department of Licensing said agents should
contact the department "If you suspect a resident of Seattle is using a
mailing address outside city limits to avoid paying the tax."

it also advises agents not to confront the customer.

Seattle voters last fall approved a city motor-vehicle excise tax to pay for
the monorail's 14-mile "Green Line" from Ballard through downtown to
West Seattle. The tax is $85 per $10,000 of calculated value this year,
and rises to $140 per $10,000 next year.

Tax revenues so far are coming in at only two-thirds the rate necessary to
sustain the Green Line's long-term funding plan. Evasion is one of several
possible reasons that have been cited.

Fred Maxie, manager of the Ballard Auto Licensing Agency, said he hasn't
tracked how many people are changing their addresses to avoid the tax,
but he knows it's going on: Some motorists who come in to relicense their
cars volunteer the information to agents.

Maxie, who attended yesterday's meeting with about 30 other agents, said
he didn't know before that he was supposed to turn over those drivers'
names to the Department of Licensing.

"It puts you in an uncomfortable position," he said. "I write your name on a
pad and I'm going to turn you in to get busted."

But Maxie said he makes it clear to customers that they're supposed to
pay the tax, even if there is no penalty in the law. "There's nothing more
unfair than to have your neighbor complying with the law, and those with
chutzpah do something different and get out of paying the tab," he said.

"Those people should not be able to do that."

Brad Benfield, spokesman for the state Department of Licensing, said that
"If there's blatant grounds they're trying to evade the tax, we'll turn them
over to the monorail people."

Generally, he said, people would have to publicly admit they're changing
their registration address to avoid the tax. If someone changes the
registration address for a $100,000 motor home to a post-office box
outside the city limits and pays with a check with a Seattle address, that
also would raise a red flag, Benfield said.

But monorail officials have no power to do anything with the names the
department provides, he added, except perhaps track the drivers.

Benfield said agents have reported a couple drivers who changed
addresses and relicensed expensive cars outside the city limits. But
because there was no evidence it was done to avoid the monorail tax,
Licensing did not turn them over to the Monorail Project.

Benfield said he can understand why this may make agents uneasy:
"From a business standpoint this would be a concern," he said.

Bergman said the Monorail Project is poring through the Department of
Licensing database to try to see how much evasion is going on. "it's very
complicated," he said. "it's one of the areas we're putting energy into to
see how big a problem it is."

Meanwhile, some Seattle residents are complaining about their monorail
bills, asserting that the state auto-depreciation formula exaggerates what
newer cars are worth and causes tax bills to be higher.

Nancy Mizrahi said she owns a 1998 infiniti, which was assessed a
monorail tax of $276 based on an assessed value of about $32,000.
However, she said, she purchased the car last year for $19,000 and it's
worth only about $17,000 today.

"This method of determining and applying assessed value is unjust," she
said. "I just dread next year (when the monorail tax increases). It gets to
the point you want to move out of the city."

in a letter to Mizrahi, Nancy Kelly, assistant director of the Department of
Licensing's vehicle services division, said the valuation method enacted
by the 1990 state Legislature "does not reflect a market or sales value."

The Legislature set a tax rate that "ensured all vehicles of the same year,
make and model were taxed the same," Kelly wrote.

Ky Huggins also owns an infiniti, a 1999 model, which he says has a
market value of $13,000 to $16,000, but is valued on his renewal notice at
$32,000.

"I've been a voting supporter of rapid/mass transit solutions to Seattle's
traffic problems over the years and have no issues paying my fair share of
taxes ... to help solve traffic problems," said Huggins. "The operative
words are 'fair share.' What makes no sense to me is the valuation basis
the state uses for it has no basis in reality."

The state depreciation schedule calculates a car's value on a sliding
percentage scale, based on age. A car that is 1 year old is considered to
retain 95 percent of its original value.

By the fourth year, the tax is based on 74 percent of original value. At 12
years the formula bottoms out at 10 percent.

Huggins said if voters had known about the size of their tax bills they
probably wouldn't have voted for the monorail. "If they come back for
more money, no way."

Susan Gilmore: 206-464-2054 or sgilmore@seattletimes.com



=PTP============================================

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/local/6958916.htm

Charlotte Observer
Wednesday, Oct 08, 2003

CATS keeps watch on funding

South Boulevard project relies on money from government

RICHARD RUBIN
Staff Writer

The next few months feature several key hurdles for Charlotte's light-rail
plans along South Boulevard, transit chief Ron Tober told the Charlotte
City Council Tuesday night.

The $371 million project relies partly on the half-cent sales tax that voters
approved in 1998. But it also needs millions of dollars in federal funding,
and that's what Tober is trying to secure this fall.

Tober and other Charlotte Area Transit System officials are spending
October revising their plans to fit requests from the Federal Transit
Administration.

CATS has hired a consultant to make sure its model for projecting
ridership meets federal expectations. Tober said the new model is not
complete yet, but could show even higher ridership in 2025.

He also encouraged the council to adopt proposals for transit-oriented
zoning along the corridors.

Tober, who has been meeting with FTA officials, said he is "very
confident" of the federal funding.

The biggest sign, Tober said, will come in January, when President Bush
sends his proposed budget to Congress.

if Bush does not include the Charlotte plan in the budget, Tober said,
"then we need ... to step back and take a look at where we're at" and
delay the project by at least a year.

By July 2004, CATS is scheduled to finish the final design of the south
corridor and receive its funding contract with the federal government.

The south corridor is the first of the five mass-transit spokes that are
planned over the next 25 years. Barring any delays or lack of funding,
service would start Oct. 1, 2006, according to the schedule Tober
outlined.

in other business

• Council members discussed the proposed city takeover of 3.1 miles of
South Boulevard, a plan that would help enable transit-friendly
development.

The state, which owns and maintains the road now, objects to a plan that
would put the light-rail track in the median between Clanton and
Scaleybark roads.

Local officials say their plan would allow room for development and would
let residents of nearby neighborhoods reach the transit station more
easily.

But council member John Tabor worried about wrecks or traffic back-ups
as cars wait for trains to pass.

"I just look at this and common sense tells me it's illogical," he said.

Transit officials assured the council that each train passage would take
about 30 seconds.

Mayor Pat McCrory said the city takeover would improve what is now a
dangerous road.

The council is scheduled to vote on the takeover Oct. 27.







PTP Digest 2003/10/08-A = CONTENTS

* Houston Metro funding is more than critics claim
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 7, 2003

* Houston: Wordy Metro ballot may please pol but cause eyestrain
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 8, 2003, 9:09PM

* Newark: LRT subway getting 1-mile, $208M extension
   Asbury Park Press 10/08/03

* Seattle LRT: Court ruling will determine fate of bids
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, October 8, 2003

* Seattle monorail: Another impact fight shaping up
   West Seattle Herald/White Center News 2003/10/08

* Orange Co: Tunnel for CenterLine LRT?
   Los Angeles Times Tuesday, October 7, 2003

* LA:  Sales tax vote in 2004 for more rail?
   Los Angeles Times Monday, October 6, 2003

* SF residents rally against higher densities
   San Francisco Examiner Monday, October 6, 2003

* DC suburbs: LRT popular, but state tops want "BRT"
   The Gazette (Montgomery County, Md) Oct. 8, 2003

* Cincinnati: LRT foe vying for seat on regional transit board
   Cincinnati Enquirer Wednesday, October 8, 2003

* Croydon UK: LRT loved despite government critics
   The Times (London) 08 Oct 2003



=PTP==============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 7, 2003


Metro mystery possibly explained

Funding reviewed by federal agency

By LUCAS WALL


The missing piece of the Metro budget puzzle might have been located
Tuesday, but nobody can say for sure if the mystery has been solved.

For the past week, the Metropolitan Transit Authority and its critics have
been arguing over a discrepancy in the amount of federal formula funds
the agency has included in the budget for its 22-year transit-expansion
plan. Voters decide the plan's fate Nov. 4.

Metro said Monday it has $71 million in unspent federal funds available,
but the Federal Transit Administration -- Metro's bank for these grants --
stated in a Sept. 26 letter that the number is $13 million. Rail critics have
jumped on the $58 million difference as an example of what they believe
is "Enron-style accounting" that will bankrupt Metro.

FTA spokeswoman Kristi Clemens said Tuesday the $13 million cited in
the Sept. 26 letter to U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, was Metro's
"unobligated" balance of federal grants. This is money Metro has but has
not yet decided how to spend.

There is another category of formula funds that are "obligated," meaning
Metro has already received FTA approval to use that money for specific
projects but has not completed them yet. Clemens said FTA staff is
researching whether Metro has an obligated-funding balance that might
explain the $58 million gap.

"I want to know the answer but haven't seen it yet," Clemens said. "We
have to go back into our system X amount of years to see what grants
have been obligated that are still in the system that Metro hasn't drawn
down."

She added it's possible Metro and the FTA have been "comparing apples
to oranges," acknowledging the details of federal transit funding
allocations "actually does get fairly confusing."

Metro President and CEO Shirley DeLibero blasted the FTA in a letter
Monday to Administrator Jennifer Dorn, contending it failed to come up
with the correct numbers or consult anyone at Metro. Clemens said Dorn
hadn't received the letter as of Tuesday afternoon and therefore had no
response.

Clemens added it's not routine to consult with a transit agency when a
member of Congress makes an inquiry about its formula funding balance
or projections, but FTA staff in Washington did run the figures by the
administration's regional office in Fort Worth.

"We do not intervene in local issues," she said. "We provide technical
assistance to a member of Congress when they ask us."

Culberson is a fierce opponent of Metro's referendum, which includes
$640 million in bonds to accelerate construction of 22 additional miles of
light rail by 2012. He said Tuesday he would not comment on the
discrepancy again until the FTA finishes re-examining Metro's accounts.

Metro provided reporters Monday with a detailed list of projects the transit
authority says it has federal funds to build. These include construction of
Metro's new downtown headquarters and transit center, addition of new
Park & Ride lots, and computerizing traffic signals.

Also Tuesday, Clemens said the rumor that Dorn had not seen or signed
the Sept. 26 letter to Culberson was false. Metro spokesman Ken
Connaughton was among those who reported hearing the rumor Monday,
but Clemens said it was "rather funny" to think someone had forged a
letter from her boss.

"If we do something in writing to a member of Congress, the administrator
sees it and signs it," Clemens said. "She's been intimately involved in this.
It's an important issue."


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2143707



=PTP===========================================

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.hts/metropolitan/2145620

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 8, 2003, 9:09PM

Wordy Metro ballot may make for sore eyes

By LUCAS WALL


Voters might have to adjust their eyes a bit when they reach Metro's
transit-expansion referendum on the Nov. 4 ballot.

The ballot language approved by the Metropolitan Transit Authority board
last month, lengthened to meet the demands of a local U.S.
representative, is too long to fit on the standard computerized ballot
screen. Employees in the Harris County Clerk's Office have been devising
a solution to the problem this week.

David Beirne, spokesman for Clerk Beverly Kaufman, said this afternoon
that it appears the office has solved the dilemma by reducing the size of
the type and placing the proposition language into separate columns.
Beirne said it's important Metro's referendum appear on one screen to
avoid confusing voters.

"This one is giving us a bit of a challenge," he said, noting with a laugh
that the length of Metro's proposal "might hold a record."

The Clerk's Office is trying to finish laying out the ballots this week so it
can began mailing paper versions to the elderly, disabled, and voters who
live abroad. Others may vote early starting Oct. 20.

Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, inserted a provision into this fiscal
year's transportation appropriations bill banning federal funding for rail in
Houston unless voters approve each segment in a referendum. When
Metro's board adopted its ballot language in August, it included a segment
list in the official resolution but did not place the list on the ballot itself
because board members, on the advice of attorneys, feared it would
make the wording too lengthy.

Turns out they were right. But Culberson stepped in last month, releasing
a letter from the Federal Transit Administration's top lawyer stating Metro's
original ballot language did not satisfy the requirements of the bill, still
pending in the Senate. Metro's board called a special meeting to change
the language Sept. 22, the deadline for submitting any propositions under
the Texas Election Code.

"it's extremely long and part of that problem is the rail components that
were called by Metro to appear on the ballot," Beirne said. "We think
we've been able to get something that everyone will be pleased with."

The type size change is "just a minor decrease" that voters should still be
able to read without trouble, he said. But if some voters can't see it clearly,
they will be able to listen to an audio version of the ballot language.

"Usually we can accommodate wordy propositions," Beirne said, "but this
one is definitely taking us to task."

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2145620




=PTP===========================================

http://www.app.com/app2001/story/0,21133,826448,00.html

Asbury Park Press
10/08/03

Newark's much-maligned subway getting 1-mile, $208M extension

Line will reduce traffic, spur development, planners assert

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

NEWARK -- For some, the terms "Newark" and "subway" could form a
kind of double negative, conjuring one-two punch imagery of crime and
grime. Others may be surprised to hear Newark even has its own subway.

"The problem with Newark, people who work here, they don't stay; six
o'clock comes, they go home," said Ken Wrangler, 55, a financial
consultant for PSE&G. "'Newark at night? Do I really want to bring my
family in?'"

it is a notion -- outdated, Newark's boosters insist -- that fueled skepticism
before the New Jersey Performing Arts Center was built, and helped
discourage now-stalled plans to build a downtown sports arena.

Nonetheless, work is under way on a $208 million, mile-long extension of
the Newark City Subway, which planners say will help reduce traffic, spur
economic development and even enhance the city's entertainment and
cultural opportunities.

Scheduled for completion in 2005, the extension will link Newark's Penn
Station, a downtown hub for New Jersey Transit, PATH and Amtrak trains
as well as NJ Transit buses, to Broad Street station, about eight blocks to
the north. About $170 million of the cost will come from federal taxes; New
Jersey taxpayers will fund the rest.

NJ Transit Executive Director George Warrington said the link will double
the ridership of the 5-mile subway line, now at about 17,000 trips per day.

Most of the new extension will be above ground.

Joe Competello, 22, of Toms River, a first-year student at Seton Hall Law
School, thought the stations could be linked for much less money and
disturbance.

"I can't understand why they don't just use shuttle buses," Competello
said.



=PTP==============================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/142910_stransited.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Wednesday, October 8, 2003

Nick of time? Court to decide

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD

if the Washington Supreme Court rules tomorrow that initiative 776 is
unconstitutional, it may be literally in the nick of time to save $94.7 million
in light rail contract bids that came in $16 million under projections. It also
should effectively disarm the argument an Oklahoma congressman has
been using to hold up a half-billion dollars in federal funding for the Sound
Transit project.

if the court ruling doesn't come tomorrow, the contracts, which expire
Friday, likely will have to be rebid -- and certainly with no guarantee that
they'll be as low in the next round.

No matter when it comes, a ruling that I-776 is valid could well tip the first
in a row of fiscal and political dominoes that could crush the light rail
project.

Sound Transit officials responded last week to demands from Rep. Ernest
Istook, R-Okla., to explain how the light rail project could weather the loss
of motor vehicle excise taxes mandated by I-776 without cannibalizing
Sound Transit projects in the rest of the three-county transit district.

But any large public works project is about more than money and
legalities. Regardless of fiscal assurances if I-776 is upheld, the political
impacts easily could outweigh the financial. The Washington Supreme
Court's validation of a voter-approved measure to slash local funding for
Sound Transit might be sufficient excuse for Istook to yank federal funding
in favor of another project elsewhere that enjoys less questionable local
support.



=PTP=============================================

http://www.robinsonnews.com/wsStory1.html

West Seattle Herald/White Center News
2003/10/08

Monorail faces Delridge flap


[PHOTO]
DUELING STEEL TRUCKS. Due to the narrow width of Andover Street, a
truck loaded with scrap steel coming to the Nucor Steel plant must swing
wide, forcing the out-bound truck loaded with finished rebar to back down.
This is the same intersection where cars and buses to the proposed
monorail station will be forced to use to reach the station a short distance
west, where a Services Group of American parking lot is now.
MATTHEW E. DURHAM


By Jack Mayne

The rosy vision of the monorail has one particular thorn. And it's a local
one.


Tom Weeks, Monorail board president and West Seattle resident,
probably summed it up best last week.


"Delridge is the most difficult (monorail station and route) to site in all of
the 14 miles of the Green Line," he said.


Services Group of America, Nucor Steel, the Delridge Neighborhoods
Development Association and an organized group of Pigeon Point
residents all oppose the "preferred" route described in the project's draft
environmental impact statement, claiming that it was a latecomer that was
selected without community input.


The current "preferred" route comes off the West Seattle Bridge near the
Delridge Way off-ramp and follows Delridge to Southwest Andover. The
Delridge station would be located in what is currently a leased parking lot
just to the east of recently restored Longfellow Creek. Then the line would
move south to Yancy and up a steep hill, making a right turn onto Avalon.


The route favored by residents (the bridge-side route) stays on the north
side of the West Seattle Bridge until it passes the northwest corner of the
Nucor Steel Co. plant. It then moves over the freeway and its various
ramps and onto Avalon Way Southwest. The station would be somewhere
over the general location of the Chelan Café.

Services Group of America operates a 122,000 square foot office building
at Andover and Delridge Way. Nucor Steel Seattle is a successful rebar-
manufacturing facility that is visited daily by 100 or so huge semi-truck and
trailer rigs. Pigeon Point residents are some of the largest potential users
of the line. And fans of the newly restored Longfellow Creek are
determined stewards of its heritage and are concerned about potential
damage from having a monorail station nearby. Well over 100 residents
around the area have signed petitions seeking to restore the bridge-side
route.


in a petition circulated last month, community activist Sharon Price who
says she is a strong monorail supporter, but not of this route - says that
the bridge-side route has parking, bus routes and would not harm local
businesses or the trails and Longfellow Creek. Price says "(Monorail
officials) changed the original placement to dip into Delridge without facts,
figures or community involvement. In fact, at the Delridge monorail
meetings, whenever someone wanted to discuss location, it was
quashed."


Bart Kale, safety and environmental manager at Nucor, says they first
heard of the route over or around the east and south side of their property
in April. Nucor is concerned that the preferred route will limit the
company's ability to grow. In addition, the preferred route takes an already
congested path on Delridge and Andover, where the semis and flatbeds
make deliveries to the plant.


"The project as it is laid out now may prevent us from servicing our
customers and that worries us," says Doug Jellison, general manager of
Nucor Steel Seattle Inc. "We want to know that the community wants and
we want to work to support that in a way that allows our business to
survive."


He, like the residents and Services Group, want "to make sure that all
route alternatives are thoroughly investigated."


"Not just analyzed for the monorail staff preferences but also for the effect
on the businesses," Jellison says. "This must be an open process."


Gary Odegard of Services Group points out many problems with the
Andover route. He notes that the Delridge and Andover intersection is
constantly clogged with trucks often forcing cars to back up to allow the
trucks to pass. He also says that nearby 24 Hour Fitness has overgrown
its parking lot and clients often park around the narrow streets of the
surrounding area.


Like many, Odegard says parking is a real issue, not only because his
company would lose parking spaces to a monorail station.


"It is unreasonable to assume that many monorail riders will use only
public transit or shuttles and not drive their own vehicles to the monorail
stations," he said, then adds, "It is also questionable whether full-sized
Metro coaches can negotiate the narrow streets in the area."


There is a suggestion that Metro might build a bus terminal near the
monorail station.


Tom Weeks, in an interview last week, said the bridge-side route was
omitted from the recently released draft environmental impact statement
primarily because it would cost too much to build a route over the freeway
and onto Avalon Way.


"Engineers said the station would have to be 100 feet high at the Chelan
Café area, and that it would be expensive, complicated and difficult to get
over the freeway," he said.


Weeks says the final environmental statement will consider this bridge-
side route.


But he defends the Andover route by noting it is the "best location for
maximized ridership (because) we are building a transit system for the
next 100 years."


No one suggests this will go away without a fight. With two large
companies and a cadre of unhappy citizens, monorail will have reason to
remember the name Delridge long after the shouting dies down.

Editor Jack Mayne can be reached at jmayne@robinsonnews.com or
932.0300.



=PTP============================================

[BATN]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-
centerline7oct07,1,7616090.story?coll=la-headlines-california

Los Angeles Times
Tuesday, October 7, 2003


CenterLine Rail Tunnel Plan Gains New Life


Urban line could go underground near the South Coast Plaza area.
Talks with business owners produce a cheaper, shorter subterranean
route.


By Dan Weikel
Times Staff Writer


Under pressure from civic leaders in Costa Mesa, Orange County
transit officials say they may agree to put the proposed CenterLine
light-rail line underground through the South Coast Plaza area -- a
compromise that would increase its cost but also help it get off the
drawing board.


in another CenterLine related development, officials for the first
time have said how many properties along the line would be purchased
through condemnation proceedings.


All or part of 483 parcels would be needed for the light-rail line
and related widening of Bristol Street in Santa Ana, according to the
Orange County Transportation Authority.


The OCTA, following discussions with Costa Mesa officials, is now
considering a tunnel that would allow CenterLine to serve one of the
county's commercial and cultural hubs.


The area includes key destinations of South Coast Plaza, the South
Coast Metro office tower area, South Coast Repertory and the Orange
County Performing Arts Center.


City Councilwoman Libby Cowan, who helped resurrect the light-rail
project last year after the transit agency shelved it for lack of
support, said the new thinking is welcome.


"In order to survive, CenterLine would have to be put underground in
Costa Mesa," said Cowan. "From our perspective, this is a very
positive step."


if built as proposed, CenterLine tracks would go from elevated above
street level to underground after turning left onto Sunflower Avenue
from Bristol Street.


Tracks would run in a tunnel for less than half a mile under Avenue
of the Arts and emerge at street level before turning left on to
Anton Street.


OCTA had planned to build an elevated line down Bristol Street that
would turn left on Anton before proceeding to other destinations. The
route would have had stops at South Coast Plaza and South Coast Metro
areas.


in February, OCTA rejected a request by Costa Mesa to have the agency
study the feasibility of placing the line underground through the
shopping center and adjacent commercial and theater complexes.


OCTA board members said the authority could not afford a $3-million
study and that they feared a tunnel would add another $250 million to
the cost CenterLine, which now is planned to run 8.5 miles from John
Wayne Airport to the train station in Santa Ana.


The request came from a coalition of business and political
interests, including C.J. Segerstrom & Sons, which owns South Coast
Plaza and other commercial properties; Sakioka Farms, another major
property holder; Commonwealth Partners, a developer; the Performing
Arts Center; and the South Coast Metro Alliance, a group of business
and property owners.


They argued that acquiring rights-of-way for the elevated line
through prime commercial property would be expensive.


The group also said the line would seriously detract from the
aesthetics of South Coast Plaza and the theater area.


in discussions over the past several months, OCTA agreed to consider
a tunnel proposal that is far cheaper and shorter than putting the
line under the original route.


The proposed tunnel length of slightly less than a mile has been cut
in half. There are no underground stations, and the $250-million
additional cost has been cut to about $50 million, according to early
estimates.


"I support the potential underground route. We are not going as far
or as deep as initially thought," said OCTA board chairman Tim
Keenan, who originally pronounced the tunnel idea dead in March due
to a lack of support among his colleagues.


The OCTA board cannot vote on the tunnel proposal until after the
public gets a chance to comment this month and next on the
CenterLine's environmental report.


OCTA officials hope to place the tunnel issue behind them in order to
show strong political support for the project, a prerequisite for
securing more than $500 million in federal funds, roughly half the
project's cost.


Political and community opposition already has reduced the length of
the line from 28 miles to 8.5 miles.


Paul Freeman, a spokesman for C.J. Segerstrom & Sons, said the new
underground route, if approved, will satisfy the concerns of the
Segerstroms and members of the business coalition.


"This is a very different tunnel," Freeman said. "Besides the cost
savings, it will provide very convenient service for anyone
interested in getting to the area's arts venues."


OCTA and the city of Santa Ana are planning to buy 303 pieces of
private property in their entirety and small parts of another 180
parcels, allowing the uses of those parcels to continue. The cost is
estimated at about $250 million.


The purchases are contingent upon CenterLine receiving final approval
by the OCTA board and the approximately $500 million in federal
funds. If the project proceeds, property owners will receive
notification next July.


Santa Ana City Manager David N. Ream said widening Bristol Street is
part of the Bristol Street Redevelopment Project, which has been
planned since 1987. CenterLine, which would run down the median of
Bristol, will accelerate the planned street improvements by almost 18
years, he said.


So far, the city has acquired more than 100 properties to help widen
Bristol in areas that are not part of CenterLine. improvements
between McFadden Avenue and Santa Ana Boulevard are along the light-
rail route.


"This will be a continuation of what is already underway," Keenan
said.


"Eminent domain is a very touchy subject. But we want to make sure it
is a fair process."



=PTP==========================================

[BATN]

Los Angeles Times
Monday, October 6, 2003


Sales Tax for MTA Could Face '04 Vote


Davis gets a bill allowing placement on the ballot. The half-cent
increase would raise billions for transit projects but need a two-
thirds approval.

By Kurt Streeter
Times Staff Writer


Assuming that it receives final state approval this month, the
Metropolitan Transportation Authority will probably ask Los Angeles
County voters to adopt a new half-cent sales tax that would raise
billions of dollars for buses, light rail lines and a costly subway
extension, among other projects.


The MTA board has not yet decided whether to put the issue on the
ballot, but key officials -- including Los Angeles Mayor James K.
Hahn and board Chairman Zev Yaroslavsky -- said the move was likely,
possibly next year but perhaps not until 2005 or 2006.


in the final days of the state legislative session last month,
lawmakers voted to give the MTA authority to put the tax measure
before voters. Gov. Gray Davis or his successor in Tuesday's recall
election has until Oct. 12 to sign or veto the bill, although no
action would be the same as approval.


The levy, which would require two-thirds approval from voters, would
raise the sales tax in most of the county to 8.75%. The increase
would last 6-1/2 years before going off the books and would raise
more than $4 billion, according to estimates.


MTA officials say it would pave the way for one of the busiest
periods of transportation construction in the region's history,
paying for a three-mile extension of the Red Line subway; a light
rail line between downtown and Santa Monica; an extension of the Gold
Line; a north-south busway for the San Fernando Valley; and new
freeway lanes, sound walls, buses and trains. MTA officials say they
could finish the construction within about 10 years.


The most vocal supporters of the bill on the 13-member MTA board are
Yaroslavsky, who is also a county supervisor; Hahn; Supervisor Yvonne
Brathwaite Burke; and Los Angeles Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa.
They all said they thought the tax increase would go before voters —
if not next year, then by 2006.


Even opponents of the measure acknowledge that the board is likely to
embrace it.


"I don't think we have the votes to stop it," said Supervisor Mike
Antonovich, an MTA board member who believes that subway
construction
is a waste of money. "I just don't feel confident there's any way to
get in front of this thing."


The MTA already has two half-cent sales taxes that raise more than $1
billion a year. When they were approved by voters in 1980 and 1990,
officials also promised an array of transit projects. Some of those
have never been built.


Voters barely approved the 1990 tax, which needed only a simple
majority. Passing muster this time, with the two-thirds approval now
required, will be extremely difficult, officials said.


"it's a hail Mary pass," Yaroslavsky said. "But we have to take this
opportunity. This is the one thing we can do to jump-start an
integrated transit system" and to ensure that "a system comes
together in our lifetime."


Yaroslavsky said the odds could change significantly if the
Legislature approved bills to reduce the threshold for countywide tax
increases to 50%.


if the proposed tax is approved, planners say, the transportation
landscape in L.A. County will be transformed after 10 years of
construction.


From downtown Los Angeles, train riders would be able to take light
rail to Santa Monica and the subway to the Los Angeles County Museum
of Art. Bus passengers would be able to crisscross the Valley in
landscaped bus-only lanes. Motorists would have fewer freeway
bottlenecks across the region.


Critics are already lining up. Some say the MTA, with its history of
mismanagement, can't be trusted to spend the tax money wisely. The
Bus Riders Union advocacy group argues that the tax would only hurt
the pocketbooks of the people who rely on transit the most -- the
poor.


And others say there's no assurance that the MTA would have enough
money to run all of the new buses and trains. The sales tax measure
doesn't include money for operations, and the MTA barely has enough
money to keep its current fleet of buses and trains going.


That opens the door for major problems, said Martin Wachs, director
of UC Berkeley's institute of Transportation Studies. "I would be
extremely reluctant about it if there's nothing for operations," he
said. "How are they going to run this system?"



=PTP==========================================

[BATN list]

San Francisco Examiner
Monday, October 6, 2003


Residents rally against density


By Jean Choung
Of The Examiner Staff
jchoung@examiner.com


Five neighborhoods in the western end of The City recently rallied in
opposition of the newly proposed Housing Element, a comprehensive
plan on how and what types of housing should be developed in The City.


The Housing Element, developed by Planning Department staff, would
open the door to increased heights and density of residential
developments citywide. And it will ruin the character of various
neighborhoods, said some west side residents.


"it's really a rezoning of the entire city," said Jeff Hagan,
president of the Francisco Heights Civic Association during a meeting
to discuss the plan Sept. 29.


The meeting, attended by 150 people, was sponsored by FHCA, the
Jordan Park improvement Association, the Laurel Heights Association,
the University Terrace Association and Ewing Terrace Association.


The proposed Housing Element has also been rejected by the Coalition
of San Francisco Neighborhoods, which is an umbrella organization of
37 different community groups citywide.


Although taller and denser housing projects are being proposed along
some transit corridors throughout The City, it is not being done at
the expense of neighborhood character, said Amit Ghosh, the chief
comprehensive planner for the Planning Department during an
interview. It is stated in one of the new policies in the plan, Ghosh
added.


He also said west side residents had very little to be concerned
about, considering 90 percent of the new Housing Element would apply
to the eastern end of the city, east of the Twin Peaks Neighborhood


The city might be fighting an uphill battle to approve the new
Housing Element as residents object to various new policies in the
document. The new plan proposes eight new policies and modifications
to nearly 50 of 70 existing policies.


One policy that some residents are especially opposed to is one that
would reduce current requirements for residential projects to create
one parking spot for every unit of housing developed.


"Virtually anywhere in the city, it is difficult to park your car,"
said Greg Hylton, who lives in the Jordan Park area. "It does not
make any sense to reduce the amount of parking spaces created," he
added.


Another proposed policy, allowing the conversion of garage spaces
into housing units, would also adversely impact neighborhoods by
decreasing the number of parking spaces available, some said.


During the meeting, people also complained that the Planning
Department has done a poor job of holding community meetings and
collecting public input, especially from the west end of the city.


"We paid to send out 3,000 invitations on our own nickel," Hagan said
about the neighborhood groups holding their own meeting on the issue.


Ghosh said the Planning Department has done more than its share of
work gathering public input. Since August 2002, he said the
department has held four public hearing and department staff attended
any meeting when an invitation was extended, he said. The process of
updating the document is tedious, Ghosh said.


The Housing Element, in place for more than 20 years as mandated by
the state government, also requires that it be updated every six
years. The City has passed the deadline of December 2001 for the most
recent update. "The state has been waiting ever since," Ghosh said.
Scarce federal and state funds designated for developing affordable
housing projects is in jeopardy without the completed document, he
said.


According to the document, the city requires approximately 20,400 new
housing units by 2006 to meet increasing demand. That figure includes
nearly 7,400 affordable units. Such units should be affordable to a
family of three, making $50,000 or less, according to the document.


The Planning Department is expected to start developing another
Housing Element next year, which is due in 2007.



=PTP==========================================

The Gazette (Montgomery County, Md)
Oct. 8, 2003

Officials briefed on corridor transitway

by Effie Bathen
Staff Writer

Second only to the question of whether a transitway linking Rockville to
Frederick should offer bus or rail service is how the transportation route
will wend its way north.

The county Planning Board met with the mayors and councils of Rockville
and Gaithersburg last Thursday for a briefing on the alignment
recommendations of the Corridor Cities Transitway following an eight-year
environmental study on the 31-mile project.

The transitway would link Shady Grove Metro Station to Frederick County
via the I-270 corridor to Route 15 at Biggs Ford Road, north of the city of
Frederick. Nearly half of the route falls within Montgomery County.

in the coming months, state Transportation Secretary Robert L. Flanagan
is expected to recommend either light rail service or a sleek European-
style bus line. Either system is expected to cost about $800 million to
construct.

Bus system gains ground

A rapid-transit bus system is "gaining ground" over light rail among
transportation officials since the environmental impact study indicates that
operating costs would be about the same or lower and allow more
flexibility in implementation.

Transportation officials weighed costs for rights-of-way and potential
increased ridership on Metro's existing Red Line. They looked at trimming
construction costs on such things as bus bypass lanes and pedestrian
overpasses at stations. They also recommended dropping a hiker-biker
trail from both the bus and rail proposals, said Henry M. Kay, director of
the state's office of transportation and transit planning.

But a light rail line has better popular support because of the impression
of "permanence," elected officials said.

Planning Board Chairman Derick P. Berlage added that light rail service
could be more appealing to commercial investment.

Meanwhile, several issues, including the location of transit stations and
yard and shop locations, remain unanswered.

For example, the Kentlands community in Gaithersburg has requested a
station to serve it directly on the west side of Great Seneca Highway
rather than at a proposed Quince Orchard Park station to the east.

Also being debated is the location of a School Drive station in
Gaithersburg and a Middlebrook station in Germantown. The proposed
project is competing with local developers at those sites, transportation
officials said.

Hardy noted that improvements on interstate 270 either with or without
dedicated high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) lanes would not eliminate
congestion on the interstate in the county by the time the transitway is
built.

The possibility of toll lanes, reversible lanes or those with tolls
proportionate to congestion may be considered in future studies.

At last week's tri-party meeting, Kay fielded questions about the proposed
project, which has seen little public debate in 10 years.

He told the gathering that the technology for a light rail line with overhead
electrical wires had not changed in 100 years. New technologies,
including hybrid vehicles and alternative fuels, on the other hand, are
being developed for rubber-wheeled buses every day.

Kay said the transitway could provide 20,000 to 25,000 trips a day
whether on rail or rubber.

A clear advantage of a modern bus system is that it could be implemented
piecemeal, he said. A light rail service would likely be built in three large
stretches: Shady Grove to Metropolitan Grove, then to the old COMSAT
property, and then on through Clarksburg into Frederick County.



=PTP=========================================

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2003/10/08/loc_sortalouis08.html

The Cincinnati Enquirer
Wednesday, October 8, 2003

Opponent of light rail considered for seat on regional transit board

By James Pilcher


The leader of the successful campaign to defeat last fall's proposed light-
rail sales tax will be considered today for a post on the board overseeing
the area's largest public transit agency.

Yet the Ohio Elections Commission in June found Stephan Louis'
Alternatives for Light Rail Transit guilty of a false statement in a television
ad during last fall's campaign.

The statement said that the Federal Transit Administration had rated the
MetroMoves plan, which included the proposed light rail system, as one of
the worst in the country. The FTA has since said that it does not rate
systems against one another, although Louis stands by the claim even
though he says he was not involved with the ad's production.

Louis' name is among as many as four to be considered today by the
Hamilton County Commission for a spot on the Southwest Ohio Regional
Transit Authority, which oversees Metro. There are two board spots
coming open soon.

E-mail jpilcher@enquirer.com




=PTP=============================================

[LRTA]

The Times (London)
08 Oct 2003

Croydon convinced it's on the right lines

By Maria Ahmed

SOUTH LONDON has always been viewed by many people, mostly those
who
live north of the Thames, as a Tubeless backwater out of reach of the
rest of the capital.

Slow and unreliable overground trains and long-winded buses made it
the blight of commuters' lives and the butt of countless jokes. But
with the start of the Tramlink network in May 2000, the grey sprawl
of Croydon was finally plugged into the mains of London's transport
system.


Although it has fallen far short of the predictions for passenger
numbers, it is very popular with those who use it. The 17½-mile route
crossing Croydon from Wimbledon through to Beckenham and New
Addington attracts 19 million passengers a year, a fifth of them
former car users.


Hope Smith, 88, from Beckenham, takes the tram to Croydon nearly
every day to meet friends for coffee and shopping. "it's so easy to
use," she said. "I always get a seat, and it's fast. My journey only
takes 15 minutes compared to 45 minutes on the bus."


The service also scores highly with parents of young children who,
handicapped with buggies, used to resort to cars rather than face
getting on a bus or train. With their double doors, floors level with
platforms and space inside to park buggies, trams have proved easy
for parents to use.


Angela Noble, 37, from Addington Village, who has two small children
aged two and four, said: "It makes such a change from the usual
nightmare of lugging a double pushchair on to a bus or Tube."


The Government's retreat from its commitment to expand trams has
placed a question mark over the planned north-south extension of the
Croydon network.


Motorists barred from roads near the town centre will not be too
sorry. David Norton, 35, a taxi driver from Croydon, said: "I still
think car drivers should have an equal right to be on the road."





PTP Digest 2003/10/07-A = CONTENTS

* Houston Metro blasts FTA, Culberson on rail issues
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 6, 2003

* Houston: Rail opponents broke tax laws?
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 6, 2003

 * Sacramento LRT: New South Line OK, but needs tweaking
   Sacramento Bee Saturday, October 4, 2003

* Tacoma: New rail station 'already bustling'
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, September 17, 2003

* Seattle: 'Monorail taxes still coming up short'
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, September 17, 2003

* Orlando: Rail transit options focus of struggle
   Orlando Sentinel September 19, 2003



=PTP=============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 6, 2003

Metro budget battle heats up at news conference

By LUCAS WALL


The battle of the Metro budget numbers turned uglier Monday with the
transit authority accusing a federal agency of issuing false figures while
rail opponents called a news conference to warn Metro will go bankrupt in
2005.

The dispute over how much federal money the Metropolitan Transit
Authority has on hand and how much it expects to get in the next six years
is the latest round in a fracas pitting Metro against its opponents and the
Federal Transit Administration. Who wins the dollar debate could
determine the outcome of the Nov. 4 transit-expansion referendum.

Meanwhile Monday, as the opposition group Texans for True Mobility
began its TV advertising campaign, the committee pushing for passage of
the Metro referendum accused the group of failing to file a required
campaign-finance disclosure. Citizens for Public Transportation said the
mobility group is violating federal tax and state ethics laws.

Metro began the day's wranglings at noon, responding in detail to
allegations made last week that it overestimated its federal revenue
through 2009 by more than $100 million. Transit officials said the FTA, on
which opponents relied for their data, failed to include $66 million already
awarded to Metro in the calculations it sent to Rep. John Culberson, R-
Houston, on Sept. 26.

"This is a lot simpler than it has been portrayed to be," said Francis
Britton, Metro's chief financial officer.

A simple day it was not, however. Texans for True Mobility, the group led
by developer Michael Stevens, responded to Metro's calculations with a 4
p.m. news conference to announce Metro will run out of money in two
years based on what he sees as the agency's reliance on false
accounting.

Also during the day, Metro's president and CEO fired off an irate letter to
the FTA's administrator -- the official who helps determine how much
transit money is sent this way -- saying she was "appalled" at the
"erroneous" numbers the agency released that are "divisive" and "will no
doubt be publicly embarrassing to both the FTA and the [Bush]
administration."

And Metro's Chairman Arthur Schechter sent another note to rail foe
Harris County Judge Robert Eckels chastising him for trying "to distract
the public from the real issues."

U.S. Attorney Michael Shelby, meanwhile, issued a statement saying he
had received Culberson's request to begin a criminal investigation of
Metro's finances, but the Justice Department prohibits him from
commenting on such a probe.

According to Metro's latest projections -- drawn up by staff over the
weekend -- it will spend $681 million in federal money through 2009. The
FTA, in projections released last week through the U.S. House
Appropriations Committee and in a letter to Culberson, states Metro will
receive $573 million -- a discrepancy of $108 million.

The transit authority said the difference is explained by two factors. The
FTA has miscalculated the amount of federal grants Metro has received in
prior years but plans to spend in the future. Second, Metro used a
different annual growth projection than included in the Bush
administration's draft of the transportation spending authorization for the
next six years.

Britton said the numbers released by Culberson and Eckels did not take
into account another $58 million in existing federal grants, not yet spent,
as well as a $7 million state clean-air grant to pay for special diesel bus
fuel.

Rail opponents said the release of Metro's figures Monday did not sway
them. Stevens said Metro is asking voters to authorize a $4.6 billion
expansion plan, including 22 more miles of light rail, "that effectively
handles 1 percent of the traffic in the region and will begin that with no
money in the bank and a negative cash flow by 2005."

if the FTA numbers prove correct and Metro continues seeing a drop in
sales-tax revenue, the authority will be $75 million in the hole in two years,
Stevens contends.

Britton acknowledged there a difference between Metro's projections and
those by the FTA of $43 million because Metro and the federal
government used a different rate to calculate annual increases in the
federal formula funds.

Metro used an 8 percent annual growth factor based on historic trends,
Britton said, while the FTA used a 2 percent rate proposed by President
Bush.

"We've got a rate of growth projected that is a reasonable expectation,"
Britton said.

But even if the president's proposal prevails, Britton said, Metro has
included an $81 million contingency to cover shortfalls.

Shirley DeLibero, Metro president and CEO, expressed aggravation that
neither Culberson nor Eckels asked Metro to explain its federal formula
estimates, but instead released their criticism to the press last week when
many Metro executives were at a transit conference in Utah and Britton
was on vacation in Mississippi.

DeLibero's letter to FTA Administrator Jennifer Dorn is an unusually harsh
critique of how the FTA handled Culberson's request for information.

"Had you or your staff afforded Metro the simple courtesy of a phone call,
we could have clarified that FTA's chart is fundamentally wrong," DeLibero
wrote.

Metro spokesman Ken Connaughton said DeLibero and Dorn discussed
the matter at last week's American Public Transportation Conference in
Salt Lake City. Dorn has told some people she did not see or sign the
Sept. 26 letter that bears a signature in her name, Connaughton said.

FTA spokeswoman Kristi Clemens could not be reached Monday evening.

Culberson said Monday he had not received the new numbers and could
not comment until his office and the FTA has a chance to review the
figures. Eckels' spokesman said the judge was out of town Monday but it
reviewing Metro's response.

This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2141333



=PTP=============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 6, 2003

Committee claims rail opponents broke tax laws

By LUCAS WALL

The political action committee campaigning for approval of Metro's Nov. 4
referendum accused its opponents Monday of breaking federal tax and
state ethics laws by failing to file a campaign finance disclosure
statement.

Monday was the deadline to file reports covering the period up to Sept.
25.

Citizens for Public Transportation, the group led by developer Ed Wulfe,
filed its report with Metro. After the deadline passed, its campaign
manager said of rival Texans for True Mobility, "clearly they crossed the
line here" by advocating for the referendum's defeat while claiming non-
profit status.

Chris Begala, a spokesman for the rail foes, disputed that his group broke
the law. Begala said Texans for True Mobility was formed as two separate
entities. One is a non-profit educational foundation that may not advocate
politically but can air informative ads such as those being run by the
Metropolitan Transit Authority promoting light rail. The second part is a
political action committee that will specifically urge voters to reject the
transit-expansion referendum.

Texans for True Mobility did not file a campaign disclosure Monday
because its political arm had not raised or spent any money by Sept. 25
and its educational arm has not spent any funds to advocate against the
referendum, Begala said.

Eddie Aldrete, campaign manager for Citizens for Public Transportation,
released a letter Monday evening he says Texans for True Mobility sent to
potential donors prior to the Sept. 25 news conference announcing the
group's formation. The letter states: "Texans for True Mobility (TTM) is a
newly created non-profit organization to discuss and propose financially
sound and effective transportation solutions. The proposed Metro
Solutions plan is neither financially sound nor effective, and we urge a
'NO' vote against it on November 4."

Aldrete said the group clearly has spent money prior to Sept. 25
advocating against the Nov. 4 transit proposition and therefore could face
an investigation by the internal Revenue Service or the Texas attorney
general if someone filed a complaint. Aldrete said his group is reviewing
whether to file such a complaint, believing the campaigning by the
opposition has been political and not permitted under laws regulating non-
profit organizations.

Begala said he could not verify whether anyone had sent out the "we urge
a 'NO' vote" letter before Sept. 25. If such a draft letter had indeed gone
out, he said, it would have been by a volunteer using personal equipment.
With no expenditure of the non-profit's money, Begala said, there would
be no violation.

Materials provided to reporters at the Sept. 25 news conference does not
include any statement urging a vote against the Metro referendum.

"I know that this was a in draft form and our legal counsel tells me that if
indeed it was sent out, let's assume it was sent out in draft form by a
person on their own private e-mail or personal e-mail account," Begala
said. "No corporate funds were ever expended to urge a no vote."

The Citizens for Public Transportation filing shows it raised $458,147 and
spent $185,315 in the month preceding Sept. 25. Its largest expense was
$123,227 to purchase television advertisements. Those have yet to air.

Spokesman Paul Mabry said it's wrong for his group to publicly release its
financial details while the opposition keeps their hidden. This mirrors a
long-running national debate over the "soft money" educational
foundations and political parties use to run advertisements that "inform"
voters without specifically pushing a certain vote.

"I don't know if they are trying to skirt the law but they are trying to skirt
around the spirit of the law, which is transparency so Houstonians can see
for themselves what a narrow-based group this is," he said. "You have a
group dominated by westside conservatives who are pooling their very
deep pockets to thwart the will of the majority."

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2141323



[BATN]

Sacramento Bee
Saturday, October 4, 2003


Mixed report card for light-rail line


New southern extension is a good start, but lots of work is needed,
riders and RT officials agree.


By Tony Bizjak
Bee Staff Writer


Days after proudly opening the south Sacramento light-rail line and
new bus routes, Regional Transit General Manager Beverly Scott
headed to a south area business meeting -- in a car.


That, she says, shows a problem.


"I could have come out here taking my own product (the bus or light
rail)," she said. "But it would take 2-1/2 hours out of my day, and
that wasn't the best use of my time."


While calling the Meadowview to downtown line "a beautiful system,"
Scott, Sacramento's top transit official, said that Sacramento's
rail and bus system still has a long way to go before it becomes
convenient to use for people who have a choice.


"We have to be able to make the service competitive on travel time,"
Scott said. "You have to have enough frequency for it to be
something you can work your life around."


That means, she said, more buses, more light rail, and neighborhood
and community planning that better supports transit.


Nevertheless, Scott and other Regional Transit officials say they
are pleased with the first week's performance of the 6.3-mile line
through the city's south area and expect it to be a boon to
commuters.


Officials said they do not yet have a ridership count from the first
week but said the trains seemed to be getting decent usage.


A Bee survey of trains found that most seats were taken during
commute hours, but non-commute-hour trains were lightly used.
Parking lots at the three southernmost stations, Meadowview, Florin
and 47th, were getting moderate usage.


RT official Cam Beach predicted ridership on the line will increase
as transit users discover its main selling point: reliability.


Other than a few glitches, trains reportedly arrived at stations on
schedule every 15 minutes during the day, Beach said.


RT police were out in force as well, stationing patrol cars at the
three park-and-ride lots.


"From a police standpoint, it's been calm," Lt. Mark Sakauye
said. "We arrested one drunk who got on a train downtown. But that's
it."


Scott's comments about the need to push for more service were backed
by the people riding the new light-rail line.


Many veteran bus riders say they were checking out the new line, and
new bus transfers, to see how it worked for them.


Eddie Robb, a state Assembly worker, said he found light rail more
comfortable and reliable than his regular bus route, but it still
requires him to take a bus transfer ride from his Pocket area
residence, which makes his commute a few minutes longer.


"From my side of town it is shorter taking the bus downtown," he
said.


But he is attracted by the rail. Unlike buses, "the trains are on
schedule, and they are definitely smoother," he said. "I like it.
It's different. I'll use it a couple of times a week."


Many south line light-rail commuters interviewed this week said they
either don't have cars or share a car with family members, and
through a variety of circumstances have ended up with jobs that
aren't near their residences.


Ramona Houghton, who lives near the new 47th Street station, this
week started a transit triple-jump to a new job in Roseville.


First, she takes the south line into downtown, then another light-
rail line to Watt Avenue, and finally a bus.


The trip takes nearly 90 minutes, she said. But, "That way, I can
leave the car for my daughter. And I'm letting someone else drive on
the stuffy freeway.


"There's my trolley! Gotta go."


An Elk Grove resident asked why the light-rail line stopped at
Meadowview rather than continuing south at least to Calvine Road.
She gave the train a try Wednesday and decided it took too
long. "I'll just stick to my bus."


Ryan Dodge, who lives near the new Fourth Avenue station and works
downtown as a security guard, said he enjoyed the ride and will use
light rail at times but didn't like the fact that a ticket into
downtown cost $1.50 at his station, but only 50 cents at the next
station north, Broadway, because it is in the Central City zone.


Dodge said a tiered pricing system based on distance might encourage
him to buy a monthly pass. RT officials said they are looking into
the possibility of having more zones with different prices someday.


Some people on the trains said they liked the little touches.


Marie Anderson, riding to jury duty Thursday morning, was delighted
with the voice announcement system.


"it's a lady's voice," she reported. "She announces the next stop. i
like it. It's gentle. Not that a man's voice can't be gentle."


George Henry, a computer technician working in Elk Grove and living
in midtown, was pleased to find four hooks for bicycles on each
train car. Light rail is a longer ride for him, because he must
transfer to a bus, but he said it is dependable and enjoyable.


"it's pleasant," he said. "I like to read. I can mind my own
business or interact with people.


"I feel this is a step in the right direction. They seem to be aware
of the need to address the needs of people in the south area."



The Bee's Tony Bizjak can be reached at (916) 321-1059 or
tbizjak@sacbee.com



[BATN: See also:


Sacramento LRT first week ridership "decent"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/14137


Sacramento opens first new LRT line in 16 years
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/14002


Editorial: Sacramento South Line light rail kudos
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/13981


South Sacramento light rail line opens today
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/13980


South Sacramento light-rail line to debut Friday
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/13968 ]




=PTP============================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/140011_commuter17.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Wednesday, September 17, 2003

Commuter rail station already bustling

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER STAFF AND NEWS SERVICES

TACOMA -- Sound Transit's Tacoma Dome commuter rail station at
Freighthouse Square is open, with lots of foot traffic and customers for
local businesses.

The new platform at Freighthouse Square officially opened this week and
shortened the walk for Sounder commuters. Until Monday, they lugged
their briefcases from the parking garage at the Tacoma Dome station to
the nearby freight yard that served as the temporary stop until the station
was finished.

The platform adds the final piece to what Sound Transit calls "the most
complete multimodal facility in the region."

The commuter rail line, the recently completed Link light rail line and
Sound Transit express buses meet up at the station, connecting
passengers with buses from Pierce Transit and Greyhound, and Amtrak
rail service.




=PTP=========================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/139903_revenue17.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Wednesday, September 17, 2003

Monorail taxes still coming up short

By KERY MURAKAMi
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

The Seattle Monorail Project collected less in taxes than expected again
in August and is likely to have a fourth month of shortfalls when taxes are
collected in October.

Monorail officials yesterday said the state collected $2.27 million in
monorail taxes in August, about 29 percent less than the $3.19 million the
agency had expected to get.

State licensing officials also told the Seattle Monorail Project yesterday
that the state sent out only $2.2 million in monorail-related motor vehicle
excise tax notices for October -- about 31 percent less than expected.

The gap could be even higher.

The tax reminders usually end up being higher than the amount collected,
because some people scheduled to renew their tabs have moved away,
state licensing spokesman Brad Benfield said.

October would be the fourth month since the state began collecting the
monorail tax in June that the project's only source of money has brought
in less than expected.

Last year, voters narrowly approved building the $1.75 billion Ballard-to-
West Seattle line.

Seattle Monorail Project spokesman Paul Bergman said the agency
already has acknowledged it is not receiving as much from the tax as
anticipated. Based on June and July's tax collections, the authority
estimates it will receive 11 percent to 33 percent less money than
expected.

The agency is expected to give a new estimate at its finance committee
meeting tomorrow morning.

But Bergman continued to say it's unknown how serious the situation is for
the project. In an interview last week, monorail finance director Daniel
Malarkey said the gap could be higher than the first two months indicated
because the state tends to collect higher amounts of the excise tax during
the summer months.

But he also said the gap could end up being smaller because some who
were supposed to renew their tabs in June and July may be
procrastinating.

"We're trying to get a handle on the psychology of renewing tabs,"
Malarkey said.

At the same time, the monorail authority is hoping to collect more taxes by
working with the state to prevent people from evading the tax by
registering their vehicles outside the city. The authority also wants the
state to begin collect the excise tax on out-of-state used cars when they
first register with the state instead of when they renew their cars a year
later.

Monorail officials, at the same time, say they're looking for ways to cut
costs without sacrificing the project's quality. Lead monorail architect Alan
Hart, for instance, said he's thinking of building a smaller station at Elliott
Avenue West and Mercer Street. Originally the station was supposed to
reach both sides of Elliott Avenue, but architects are now considering
building it only on the east side of the street.

But Joel Paston, a monorail critic who has been monitoring the tax
shortfall, said, "They've provided no evidence that they have the bonding
capacity to build this project."

P-I reporter Kery Murakami can be reached at 206-448-8131 or
kerymurakami@seattlepi.com



=PTP===========================================

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/orl-
loctaxrail19091903sep19,0,4915117.story?coll=orl-news-headlines

Orlando Sentinel
September 19, 2003

Transit options pose a puzzle

By Scott Powers
Sentinel Staff Writer

if Orange County voters go for a half-cent sales-tax increase to fix roads,
they'll also be approving $400 million for a transit system that has yet to
be revealed.

The Mobility 20/20 sales-tax referendum would raise $2.6 billion if voters
approve it Oct. 7. While most of the money would go toward improving
and expanding I-4 and 50 other streets and highways, the second-largest
chunk would be used for an unspecified mass-transit plan.

That plan could well be a revival of serious efforts to build a light-rail
transit system in the county, four years after the last effort fell in an
explosive political fight at the Orange County Commission. Or it could be a
proposed commuter train to ride tracks north-south through much of
Central Florida.

State and local transportation planners are spending hundreds of
thousands of dollars to study the commuter rail and two separate light-rail
lines, and Orange County leaders eagerly await the results.

Until the options are studied and sorted, which will take a year or more,
those political leaders insist they can't say whether transit money would
buy Orange County a light rail, a commuter rail, both or neither.

What it would buy right away is a spot in the six-year federal-funding
process, giving the county time to decide what it wants, said County
Chairman Rich Crotty, patron of Mobility 20/20.

"Having the availability of funds to do something like this is critical," Crotty
said. "What it's going to be, we really don't know."

Such uncertainty opens a big target for critics, who say voters deserve
answers to costly questions, such as where the system would run, who
would ride it, how much it would cost, and what government would front
operating subsidies that could oversee tens of millions of dollars a year.

"How can voters trust the entities involved when they haven't answered
those questions in advance?" Ax the Tax activist Doug Guetzloe said.
"That, to us, opens a huge, unfunded, undesignated liability to the
taxpayers."

County leaders push system

For years, Orange County leaders have insisted there is an urgent need
for mass transit to ease crowding on overburdened roads, especially one
that might parallel I-4, and to provide more ways to get around town.

A new transit-authority board composed of the Orlando mayor, Orange
County chairman and Florida Department of Transportation District 5
secretary would sort the options.

The board could conclude that transit systems are too much trouble or
money or won't carry enough riders, said Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer.
Then the Mobility 20/20 governing board, made up of the county
commission, the Orlando mayor and mayor pro-tem, would figure out what
to do with the $400 million.

"I suppose the transit authority could come to that conclusion. I don't think
it will," said Dyer, a light-rail supporter. "The transit authority's hands aren't
tied into commuter rail. They're not tied into light rail."

Light rail involves trolley-like trains that carry commuters, shoppers and
tourists on short, stop-and-go trips along small tracks that can be
squeezed into roadways. Commuter rail takes commuters on longer trips
with fewer stops, using conventional-size trains on standard railroad
tracks.

Critics point at expense

Guetzloe has long opposed light rail, calling it an expensive, unnecessary
boondoggle. He and other Mobility 20/20 opponents accuse backers
either of stealthily pursuing a light-rail proposal that has been rejected
twice or of asking for $400 million with few strings attached.

Backers point out that if Orange County gets $400 million for construction,
it could attract a matching amount from Florida. With that $800 million,
Orange County could apply for a matching amount from the Federal
Transit Administration, competing against more than two dozen other
cities seeking the same limited funds.

"What's really important is we're preserving alternatives for the future,"
said James Harrison, Orange County public works manager.

"There are a number of alternatives out there. Mobility 20/20 is not about
light rail. It is about making sure we can come to the table and compete
once this community has decided its vision."

Transit plans offer choices

The most developed plan features a light-rail line from Altamonte Springs,
weaving in and out of the I-4 corridor to downtown, Universal Studios, the
Orange County Convention Center and SeaWorld, with a couple dozen
stops.

it could cost $1.5 billion to build, just about right for the $1.6 billion that
Mobility 20/20 could get.

Another light-rail proposal starts at Orlando international Airport and
roughly follows the Bee Line Expressway (State Road 528) to the Florida
Mall and the convention center, with fewer than 10 stops. It might cost
$600 million to $700 million.

The third major proposal, a pet project of U.S. Rep. John Mica, R-Winter
Park, features a commuter-rail train running from Volusia County through
Orlando into Osceola County, on existing CSX railroad tracks. Mobility
20/20 would be responsible only for the Orange portion of the estimated
$150 million cost, perhaps less than $20 million.

The north-south light-rail plan is a revision of one that Orange County
commissioners rejected in 1999, which was an extension of one that
Orange County voters rejected as part of a 1997 ballot initiative.

The 1999 rejection might haunt Orange County when it applies for federal
money, cautioned Edward Coven, FDOT state-transit manager.

The Federal Transit Administration had pledged $330 million to the 1999
plan, only to be spurned.

"it's a strong hurdle to overcome. The FTA made quite a commitment to
that previous Orlando proposal and they were burned," Coven said.

Commuter line could be 1st

Dyer suspects the commuter line might get started first, since it is
cheapest and easiest, provided CSX could be persuaded to let the train
share its tracks, something the company has shown no enthusiasm for.

The plan already has $8 million in federal and state commitments, and it
has Mica, with his key congressional connections.

Dyer added, "I think then it probably evolves into a light-rail system, and i
emphasize 'system' " --meaning he looks forward to both the airport
connector and north-south light-rail lines being developed.

Crotty prefers the airport-connector line as a first step. It offers the
prospect of carrying tens of thousands of tourists and conventioneers,
along with a few local residents, easing the county's risk to have to pay big
operating subsidies.

That could make expansion easier.

"You have to look at who might ride it, and where they are," he said. "in
my mind, from the airport to the convention center and the tourism-
activities center makes the most sense."

Scott Powers can be reached at spowers@orlandosentinel.com or 407-
420-5441.





PTP Digest 2003/10/06-A = CONTENTS

* Houston suburb draws up is own rail transit plan
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 5, 2003

* Houston paper blasts 'unethical' pol's anti-rail intrigues
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 3, 2003

* Salt Lake: LRT having mixed impact on neighboring businesses
   Deseret Morning News (Salt Lake City) Sunday, October 5, 2003

* 'Light rail giving UTA ridership a major lift'
   Deseret News (Salt Lake City) Sunday, October 05, 2003

* Minneapolis: As LRT nears startup, focus on luring riders
   Minneapolis Star Tribune 09/21/2003



=PTP=================================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 5, 2003

Fort Bend drawing up commuter rail plan

25-mile project linking suburbs to city weighed

By ERIC HANSON


SUGAR LAND -- While the battle over the referendum for Metro's 22-mile
Houston rail expansion heats up, leaders in Fort Bend County are putting
together a commuter rail project that could deliver thousands of
suburbanites to downtown and the Texas Medical Center.

Fort Bend leaders say a commuter line connecting the fast-growing county
with Metro's light rail system could be one way to ease traffic problems
and provide greater mobility to a wider area.

Missouri City Mayor Allen Owen said people eventually will want to take
rail from Fort Bend County to such destinations as Hobby Airport, the
Galleria and Bush intercontinental Airport.

"Every day when I am out in public, someone walks up to me and asks,
'How is the train line coming?' " Owen said.

The Fort Bend line would use the U.S. 90A rail corridor to shuttle riders
from Rosenberg to Metro's light rail station in the area of Fannin and Loop
610.

Supporters say a Fort Bend commuter line is at least a decade away.
Before trains start running, several elements must be in place:

First, a lengthy study has to be completed to see if the proposal makes
sense.

Next, the cooperation of the Union Pacific railroad is essential because
any commuter service would have to be compatible with the railroad's
freight operation.

Then, Texas lawmakers must create a transit authority to sell bonds and
build and run the system.

Metro has agreed to eventually fund eight miles of the route within its
service area, from Fannin/Loop 610 to Missouri City. The other 17 miles
would have to be paid for by the proposed Fort Bend County transit
agency.

While Metro's Nov. 4 referendum includes the Missouri City segment of
the commuter train in the long-range system blueprint, no money has
been identified to pay for it by 2025.

The rail proposal has strong and active support from some elected
officials, but others are more cautious.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, has said he will back a
Fort Bend rail line if there is strong public support for it.

But County Judge Bob Hebert said a Fort Bend line should be tied into a
larger system, and not just Metro's light rail system.

"If somebody can get on a rail system in Rosenberg and get downtown in
45 minutes and read the newspaper or use their laptop, now you are
talking about something that becomes attractive," he said, "But if they go
downtown (Houston) and have to take two trains, it won't work."

A feasibility study, conducted by the Houston-Galveston Area Council,
has been under way for a year and a half.

The final report has not been released, but some preliminary findings
have been made public.

The 25-mile project would start in Rosenberg and run through Richmond,
Sugar Land, Missouri City and Stafford to Houston. The line would
connect to Metro's Fannin South Park & Ride lot near Reliant Stadium,
where commuters could change trains and head on to the Texas Medical
Center and downtown.

Stations are planned in each Fort Bend County city and one in southwest
Houston.

Earl Washington, special transportation planner for the council, said the
final report should be finished in December.

in March, Washington said the preliminary report found that building the
project would cost between $75 million and $126 million. He said ridership
was estimated at 3,000 to 5,000 each weekday. Owen said new ridership
figures are higher than originally thought, between 6,000 and 11,000
people on weekdays.

Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace said new construction estimates put the
price at between $350 million and $700 million.

Wallace said planners estimate that a commuter-rail system might be able
to break even in daily operations but that income from fares may not be
sufficient to pay for debt service.

The existing rail line passes by several residential neighborhoods, and
Wallace said city officials will have to consider possible noise and safety
issues associated with a commuter line.

Wallace said he has many questions about a commuter rail, and he
added that the city has not taken a position on the issue.

in Rosenberg, where commuters face farther drives to Houston than
commuters from any other Fort Bend city, Mayor Joe Gurecky said he
thinks a rail line has potential.

"Looking 10 to 15 years in the future, it is going to be congested here," he
said. "This is a long-range transportation issue that we need to start
working on now."

After the Houston-Galveston Area Council releases its feasibility study in
two months, Owen said, a more comprehensive planning study must be
conducted.

Meanwhile, Hebert said people must be sold on the idea that riding a train
is in their best interest. He said if a 3 1/2-hour round-trip drive can be cut
by an hour, then commuters might consider using the train.

"I can use that two half-hours to do something else. Now you have given
me some value," he said.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2139749




=PTP===============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 3, 2003

Editorial

DEMOLITION DERBY

Unethical Culberson menacing this city's interests

Thirty years ago, President Nixon and his aides thought nothing of using
the CIA and FBI to thwart justice, harass opponents and advance
unseemly political ends. U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Katy, is trying to
revive the tradition.

Culberson is a protege of U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-
Sugar Land, and therefore is an implacable foe of rail transit for Houston.
First DeLay and now Culberson have used a seat on the powerful House
Appropriations Committee's transportation subcommittee to punish their
own constituents. Between the two of them, they have blocked federal rail
transit funds for Houston while channeling billions to rail projects in 33
other cities.

Culberson is free to argue against rail transit, but if light rail is so bad, why
do so many other cities have it or want it? is Houston so different from
Dallas, Atlanta and other car-choked metropolises that have built clean,
useful rail transit lines? if rail is a waste of tax dollars, why have DeLay
and Culberson been so willing to fund projects in other cities?

Now Culberson has asked the U.S. attorney's office here to investigate
the Metropolitan Transit Authority and its 22-year budget projections.
Houstonians can consider this the unethical cherry atop Culberson's
sundae of malicious and opportunistic behavior.

Culberson alleges that because Metro's revenue projections are higher
than his, Metro should be the subject of a criminal investigation. The
congressman admitted he was so busy grandstanding about his request
for a "confidential" investigation that he didn't bother to ask Metro to back
up its numbers.

After only a few years in Washington, Culberson believes that disagreeing
with him is a federal offense. If making faulty revenue projections were a
crime, President Bush, many of his aides and most members of Congress
would be indicted for being half a trillion dollars off the mark in a single
year.

Culberson is not part of a vast conspiracy to thwart Houston's public
interest, but he is not acting alone. A tiny cadre of wealthy, selfish
developers, highway contractors and ambitious Harris County officials are
using Metro as a whipping boy in order to thicken their wallets or
consolidate their power.

in the process, they are sending hundreds of millions of dollars in federal
aid elsewhere, poisoning Houston's reputation in Washington and
endangering regional mobility. Seldom has so much harm been done to
so many by so few.

Metro owes it to the public to state how it arrived at its revenue
projections, and why they are more reliable than Culberson's numbers.
However, Culberson and his allies have made it clear that Metro can
never satisfy them. They criticized Metro for not using historical trends to
predict sales tax revenue, and condemn it for using historical trends to
estimate federal aid.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/2136459



=PTP============================================

Deseret Morning News (Salt Lake City)
Sunday, October 5, 2003

    Light-rail line a mixed bag for neighboring businesses

By Jody Genessy
Deseret Morning News

      It's common knowledge that business at TRAX has far exceeded
expectations. Question is: How has TRAX been for neighboring
businesses?
      While some companies seem to be chugging right along, thanks in
part to Salt Lake County's light-rail system, others have been derailed by
hopes that have so far been higher than profits.
      Managers of the Apollo Burger thought they had a perfect recipe for
success when they opened up a new fast-food restaurant next to the
station on 3300 South. And considering TRAX's higher-than-anticipated
ridership, that line of thinking seemed sound. But it hasn't exactly turned
out that way. Sure, some riders and employees wander the 100 yards to
the joint, but the lobby isn't exactly crammed with TRAX traffic.
      "It's been terrible for us," lamented a manager, wishing to remain
anonymous. "All we get off TRAX is people using our restrooms and
wanting free stuff. It's been very surprising for me."
      At least Apollo Burger's registers are still ringing up some orders. The
same can't be said of another business that saw dollar signs when it
opened up near the Ballpark Station by Franklin Covey Field. But the 13th
South Stop shop, a mini-market to the west of the rails, didn't stay in
business for very long.
      "UTA hopes those types of developments can be sustained by
communities surrounding them," said UTA spokeswoman Marti Money. "I
guess its time just hadn't come."
      The Gateway is perhaps the biggest business beneficiary of TRAX.
The west-side Salt Lake City shopping haven opened after the system
was in place, but being located at the end of the line has made it an
attractive destination for many public-transit-using shoppers.
      "Activity at the Delta Center station really picked up once The
Gateway was built," Money said.
      Though a formal study hasn't been conducted by the Crossroads
Plaza, the mall's marketing director makes an "educated guess" that
TRAX has bolstered business at the downtown shopping center. If nothing
else, it gives extra exposure to the store windows and banners.
      "We're very glad they're our neighbors," Chris Stanger said. "It has
been a very positive experience for the shopping centers (ZCMI Center
included). Stand at the doors on Main Street and watch, you'll see people
come with bags getting on TRAX. You see them come off TRAX and
come into the shopping center."
      UTA's goal was to be a partner in TRAX communities as far as helping
future development and local economies. And TRAX seems to have had a
positive impact for businesses along the 400 South corridor. A recent
economic study there revealed that sales tax revenue was down only 5
percent along that line compared to a citywide 17 percent drop. It could be
linked to the recession and/or a post-Olympic lag.
      "The recessive economy has affected service-oriented business along
400 South," Money said. "Those types of businesses still follow the
market conditions."
      Cities including West Valley City and West Jordan — and Farmington
and Woods Cross for commuter rail — are working with UTA to determine
the viability of businesses for future rail spurs. To that point, they have an
advantage because the first TRAX lines had to follow pre-existing railroad
tracks.
      "When they see new lines coming in, they can plan around those to
make transit-oriented business successful," Money said. "With the main
line, it was difficult because the railroad track was already in place."

E-mail: jody@desnews.com




=PTP===========================================

Deseret News
Sunday, October 05, 2003

Light rail giving UTA ridership a major lift

But TRAX lines to take back seat to commuter rail

By Stephen Speckman
Deseret Morning News

Light rail is a hit. The ridership numbers prove that.
Deseret Morning News graphic

[PTP NOTE: Graphic is a table showing data as follows:
Year ...        Bus ...        TRAX ...        Paratransit Bus
1998 ...   23.4 million ...        -     ...       -
1999 ...   -                ...        -     ...       426,000
2000 ...   22.9 million ...   6.1 million ...  490,000
2001 ...   22.2 million ...   6 million ...     537,000
2002 ...   21.2 million ...  10.2 million ...  546,000
2003* ...  13.8 million ...    6.3 million ...  351,000
*Jan.-Aug. 2003]

in fact, mass transit ridership combined for the Utah Transit Authority
hasn't been as high for the Salt Lake area since the 1940s, a time of light
rail's first incarnation in Utah.
Today's version of light rail, TRAX, has played a major factor in boosting
UTA's overall numbers.
But plans for at least three new light-rail spurs are going to have to wait a
few more years as they take a back seat to UTA's next big project,
commuter rail.
It was once thought that spurs into West Valley City and the southwest
portion of the Salt Lake Valley would be on line somewhere between 2008
and 2010.
"I think now we're realistically looking at 2012, 2013, in that range," said
John inglish, UTA general manager.
A planned spur to Salt Lake City international Airport could be put off
even longer.
That's because it's going to take about $350 million to $400 million to build
a 40-plus-mile commuter-rail - faster than light rail - line between Salt
Lake City and Pleasant View in Weber County, with at least seven stops
in between.
Some of that money has already been spent in the landmark acquisition
of rail right of way from Union Pacific, with the first 40 miles worth an
estimated $75 million.
And in the next round of federal transit allocations, Utah is looking for
another $25 million just for commuter rail.
Funding for commuter rail will end up at a 50/50 federal-to-local match -
UTA's first light-rail spur saw the government kicking in 80 percent of the
$312 million cost.
Despite uncertain, limited federal transit funds, the plan is still to have
commuter rail in sooner than later.
"We set a goal for 2007, and we intend to keep it," inglish said.
In  the meantime, light rail's popularity is expected to keep gaining speed
while UTA tries to stay ahead of the crowds by adding more and more rail
cars.
But some would argue that TRAX has merely stolen riders from UTA
buses. While that's true, overall ridership throughout UTA's system has
increased.
Mike Allegra, UTA director of transit development, said UTA is averaging
more than 100,000 trips a day on weekdays (some people use UTA more
than once a day) "in a system where we were never carrying that many
before."
About 85 percent of UTA riders still take the bus - the rest use TRAX,
which is bringing in riders who have never used either the bus or train.
It's expected that total TRAX ridership this year will exceed 30 million.
That figure will include riders on UTA's newest line.
On Sept. 29, the new $90 million 1.5-mile TRAX medical center line
through the University of Utah campus will open, about a year ahead of
schedule. UTA will get seven new light-rail cars at $2.8 million each for
that line.
By October, UTA will have 19 miles of track in operation at a total cost of
almost $510 million.
The number of UTA's steel wheels is going up 72 percent with the
acquisition of 29 used light-rail cars from a California transit agency for
$18.6 million.
Some of the used cars will be in service next year. That should bring relief
to already cramped cars, particularly during rush hour, special events and
on weekends.
With so much attention being paid to Utah's mass transit darling, TRAX,
some wonder what will happen to UTA's bus system.
One plan is to explore bus rapid transit. UTA plans on introducing bus
rapid transit to four areas to start: Provo/Orem in Utah County, 3500
South in Salt Lake County, routes to Salt Lake City international Airport
and parts of south Davis County.
Bus rapid transit operates on several different technologies, but the gist is
that the buses are able to travel faster through traffic on secondary streets
than the average bus or car. It's also a system that costs about one-third
less than light rail.
Allegra said UTA needs to work on improving its frequency of bus service
for some routes. That may come with more localized hubs and transit
corridor development.
And those true to the comfort, safety and security of their cars may soon
see more reasons to use mass transit as UTA works on making its
vehicles more compatible with those things the automobile offers â€"
without having to drive.
Trax funding/costs
* 15-mile north/south line, $312 million, 80 percent federal funds
* 2.5-mile University line, $118.5 million, 70 percent federal funds
* 1.5-mile Medical Center line, $89.4 million, 60 percent federal funds
* 40-plus-mile commuter rail-line, estimated cost between $350 million to
$400 million, about 50 percent federal funds

E-mail: sspeckman@desnews.com



=PTP===============================================

Minneapolis Star Tribune
09/21/2003

As LRT work continues, officials think about luring riders

Laurie Blake

Looking up at the sun reflected in the color panels she selected for the all-
glass light-rail station above E. Lake Street, artist JoAnn Verburg can feel
it: The train is coming.

Hiawatha Avenue light rail is 80 percent completed. The start of service is
but seven months away.

Heavy construction has shifted to the Bloomington end of the 12-mile line.
And in Minneapolis, stations are undergoing finishing artistic touches.

For St. Paul artist Verburg: "it's thrilling to me to see people looking up at
the building, and my color of glass is part of that. I just can't wait to see
real transit users walk past my colors and hop on a train."

Riders will be able to jump on in April when the line opens between
downtown Minneapolis and Fort Snelling. The rest of the line, through the
Minneapolis-St. Paul international Airport and on to Bloomington with a
final stop at the Mall of America, is scheduled to open in December 2004.

With the start of service in view, the project's pace is picking up, said John
Caroon, manager of the design-build effort for the Minnesota Department
of Transportation (MnDOT).

Dry weather allowed strong progress this summer, Caroon said, and it
was a good thing.

"It seems like no matter what kind of project it is, when you get close to
the wire, things start to get compressed a little bit."

Rail construction requires work in sequence: move the earth, put in the
ties and lay the rail.

Said Caroon: "If a little more time is taken by putting in the rail or the ties,
that can cause more stress on later activities, such as putting in the signal
system and wiring for closed-circuit TV at the stations. We still plan on
being into revenue service in April of 2004. And we are going to do what's
necessary to cause that to happen."

Here are glimpses of progress.

The budget

This year, the decision was made to tweak the route of the line through
Bloomington, putting the last stop right at the Mall of America's transit
hub.

That added about $40 million to the cost -- bringing the total to about $715
million.

About $9.2 million remains in the contingency fund to cover unexpected
expenses in 2004 and it will all be used, said Mark Fuhrmann, chief
financial officer for the project.

Wooing riders

A chief concern is how to get passengers on board once the trains start
rolling. The goal: 20,000 daily passengers by 2005. "That's the first thing
by which it will be judged," said Mike Setzer, Metro Transit general
manager.

About 40 connecting bus routes will deliver passengers to the trains. And
Metro Transit plans to offer free rides on initial weekends. Sports fans are
also expected to fill the trains on the way to the Metrodome.

Beyond that, the ridership campaign will include airport advertising aimed
at tourists and conventioneers, mailed invitations to residents along the
line, and advertisements encouraging suburban commuters to park and
ride the rail line.

Light rail also will be advertised through the state's tourism bureau and
hotel industry, said Bob Gibbons, director of customer services for Metro
Transit.

With luck, all the buzz will encourage people to ride, he said.

But officials are making an early disclaimer: in April, the line will open only
part way. The real ridership race won't be on until the trains run all the
way to the Mall of America next December.

The cars

Twenty-four rail cars have been ordered for the service. Two have been
delivered, one is en route and 14 will be needed to open the line in April,
Setzer said.

The cars will be equipped with molded snowplows to sweep the snow off
the tracks, a blade on the cantenary will clear power lines of ice, and
heating elements on the roof will melt snow.

it would be nice to have one big blizzard this winter, Setzer said, to put
these features to the test.

More parking

The line lacks parking.

About 1,400 spaces are planned, but Setzer said 4,000 to 5,000 are
needed. He continues to look for more. His latest proposal is to designate
spaces at the underused parking ramp at the airport's Humphrey terminal
for a light rail park-and-ride site.

The ramp has open space, and the Metropolitan Airports Commission is
considering the idea. But because airport revenues were used to build the
parking ramp, users must pay to park there, said Patrick Hogan, Airports
Commission public-affairs director. Typically park-and-ride parking is free.

There will be 600 free parking spaces available to commuters at the 28th
Street Station in Bloomington and 880 at the Fort Snelling Government
Services Administration Building.

The plan had been to raze a MnDOT maintenance facility near Fort
Snelling to provide parking space but because of the state's budget crisis,
there isn't money to rebuild the maintenance building elsewhere.
Negotiations are underway to make other property available for parking
there, Caroon said.

The artwork

in all, $80 million, about11 percent of the total spending for the line, was
spent on the 17 stations, which were individually designed to suit their
surroundings.

Another $2.5 million was budgeted for public art at the stations.
Seventeen artists have been commissioned to add artistic touches at the
stations, including paver patterns, decorative railings, etchings on glass
windscreens and an enameled mural on the side of the light-rail
maintenance building.

Fundraising continues to expand the program, said David Allen, art and
transit administrator for the project.

Laurie Blake is at lblake@startribune.com.





PTP Digest 2003/10/05-A = CONTENTS

* Study: Public transit relieves traffic delays, costs
   Metro October 1, 2003

* Sacramento's new South Line has smooth first week
   Sacramento Bee Friday, October 3, 2003

* Seattle: Budget cuts could keep LRT project on track
   Seattle Times Saturday, October 04, 2003

* Seattle LRT: 'Istook might still raise trouble'
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Saturday, October 4, 2003

* Seattle monorail: Crews drill for soil samples
   West Seattle Herald/White Center News 2003/10/02

* DC Metro facing fiscal, service crisis
   Washington Post Monday, September 22, 2003

* Toronto op-ed: Tolls should help fund transit
   Globe and Mail (Canada) Thursday, October 2, 2003

* Amtrak: Senate panel opposes Bush dismantling plan
   Washington Post Friday, October 3, 2003



=PTP=============================================

http://www.metro-magazine.com/t_newspick.cfm?id=9056859

Metro
October 1, 2003

Public transit relieves traffic congestion, study says

Transit is successfully reducing traffic delays and costs in America's 75
largest urban areas according to data released Tuesday by the Texas
Transportation institute (TTI).

This year's study reports that regular bus and train services in America's
most congested cities saved drivers more than one billion hours in travel
time in 2001.

Without transit, nationwide delays would have increased by nearly 30%,
costing residents in the major urban areas studied an additional $21.2
billion in lost time and fuel.

Among its conclusions, the TTI study found that the average annual delay
time per person climbed from 16 hours in 1982 to 60 hours in 2001.

During that same period, the extra time needed for rush hour travel tripled.

The cost of congestion in 75 major U.S. cities in 2001 totaled nearly $70
billion.

To find out more information on the study, log on to
mobility.tamu.edu/ums/news_release/




=PTP========================================

[BATN]

Sacramento Bee
Friday, October 3, 2003

Few bumps cited during light-rail line's first week

By Tony Bizjak
Bee Staff Writer

Regional Transit General Manager Beverly Scott and other transit
officials say they are pleased with the first week's performance of
their 6.3-mile line through Sacramento's south area, and expect it to
be a boon to commuters.


Officials said they do not yet have a ridership count from the first
week, but said the trains seemed to be getting decent usage.


A Bee survey of trains found that most seats were taken during
commute hours, but non-commute-hour trains were only lightly used.
Parking lots at the three southernmost stations, Meadowview, Florin
and 47th, were getting moderate usage.


RT official Cam Beach predicted ridership on the line will increase
as transit users discover its main selling point -- reliability.


Other than a few glitches, trains reportedly arrived at stations on
schedule every 15 minutes during the day, Beach said.


RT police were out in force, as well, stationing patrol cars at the
three park-and-ride lots.


"From a police standpoint, it's been calm," Lt. Mark Sakauye
said. "We arrested one drunk who got on a train downtown. But that's
it."


Many veteran bus riders say they were checking out the new line, and
new bus transfers, to see how it worked for them.


Eddie Robb, a state Assembly worker, said he found light rail more
comfortable and reliable than his regular bus route, but it still
requires him to take a bus transfer ride from his Pocket area
residence, which makes his commute a few minutes longer.


"From my side of town it is shorter taking the bus downtown," he
said. But he is attracted by the rail. Unlike buses, "the trains are
on schedule, and they are definitely smoother," he said. "I like it.
It's different. I'll use it a couple of times a week."


For more details, see Saturday's Bee.




=PTP===============================================

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001758243_transit04m
0.html

Seattle Times
Saturday, October 04, 2003

Sound Transit letter details cuts

By Alex Fryer
Seattle Times Washington bureau


WASHINGTON — With time running out on millions of dollars in
construction bids, Sound Transit yesterday outlined how it could build light
rail, maintain commuter rail and bus service, and not tap into Eastside
revenue if the agency loses its court fight to collect motor-vehicle taxes.

Without offering specifics, Sound Transit laid out several cost-saving
scenarios in a letter to federal transit officials dated Thursday and
released yesterday.

For example, Sound Transit could save $25 million if it dropped building
the Federal Way Transit Center.

Plans for express buses and commuter-rail service across the region
would be spared, but buses and trains would not run as frequently as
planned, the agency said.

"The letter responds to all our critics," said King County Executive Ron
Sims, who is also Sound Transit board chairman. "We have done the best
we can."

Sims said the agency could not give a more detailed report without
holding public hearings.

it's a critical period for the future of the proposed $2.4 billion light-rail route
from Seattle to Tukwila.

Time is running out on two pending construction contracts, worth $94
million. The contracts came about 15 percent under budget, but the bids
expire Friday.

"Obviously, we are concerned (about the deadline)," said Sims. "We have
great bids. We want to capture these savings."

On Sept. 10, an influential congressman, Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla.,
disapproved of a $500 million grant from the Federal Transit
Administration to Sound Transit. Agency officials say the grant is essential
before it can begin building light rail.


The agency is hoping Istook will change his position and release the grant
now that it has tried to answer his questions about the potential impact of
initiative 776.

Istook had challenged Sound Transit to explain how it would absorb the
potential loss of motor-vehicle taxes should the state Supreme Court
uphold I-776.

He also wants to know if the agency could build light rail without tapping
into tax money collected on the Eastside and earmarked for transit
improvements.

it was too early to tell yesterday if the letter will satisfy Istook's concern.

i-776 is a Tim Eyman-sponsored measure that would limit all car tabs to
$30, and cut $703 million from the Sound Transit budget. A King County
Superior Court judge ruled that I-776 is unconstitutional, and the
initiative's backers appealed.

Last week, Sound Transit asked the state Supreme Court to hurry its
opinion on the case.

Alex Fryer: 206-464-8124 or afryer@seattletimes.com



=PTP===========================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/142573_transit04.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Saturday, October 4, 2003

Sound Transit hopes plan ensures federal money

By KERY MURAKAMi
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

Trying to free $500 million in federal light rail funds held hostage by an
Oklahoma congressman, Sound Transit officials said yesterday the
agency would not have to use taxes from people not directly benefiting
from light rail -- even if a court rolls back the agency's taxes.

However, Sound Transit said it might have to dip into money it had saved
for extending the light rail line to Northgate and slow down some
improvements in Sounder commuter rail and express buses.

in writing to the Federal Transit Administration, Sound Transit officials
tried to ease some of the concerns raised by Rep. Ernest Istook Jr., R-
Okla., chairman of the House subcommittee that hands out federal
transportation dollars.

Istook had taken the FTA to task in August for recommending funding for
the controversial Seattle-to-SeaTac rail line.

Istook was concerned about what would happen if the state Supreme
Court were to uphold initiative 776, thus rolling back the 0.03 percent
motor vehicle excise tax the transit agency collects.

That would cost Sound Transit $704 million in tax and bond revenue,
$115 million of which is slated for the light rail project. Istook wondered
whether the agency would still be able to build light rail without drawing
money from areas like the Eastside, that wouldn't get rail service.

Sound Transit taxes paid by King, Pierce and Snohomish counties are
only supposed to be used for service in those areas. Much of the money
raised in the Eastside is supposed to be used for commuter buses.

The Federal Transit Administration had approved the federal funding, but
forwarded Istook's questions on to Sound Transit anyway.

Yesterday's response -- from Sound Transit Chairman Ron Sims, Vice
Chairmen Jon Ladenburg and Dave Earling, and finance Chairman Kevin
Phelps -- came even as Sound Transit awaited a Supreme Court ruling
that might render the entire question moot. Sound Transit has asked for
an expedited ruling to leave the tax in place. The court did not rule
yesterday.

it was unclear whether Sound Transit's seven-page letter will satisfy
Istook. He had asked for a specific contingency plan showing how Sound
Transit would deal with the loss of taxes if it loses the court case. Sound
Transit's letter detailed several possible funding sources, but did not
specifically lay out what would be cut.

Sims, who is the King County executive, said coming up with an actual
plan would take a lengthy public involvement process. The agency is
facing an Oct. 10 deadline to accept two construction bids that came in 15
percent below estimates.

Istook spokeswoman, Micah Swafford, said the congressman was in
Oklahoma and would not see Sound Transit's letter until Monday night.

She also left open the possibility that Istook might still raise trouble for
Sound Transit, even if the letter were adequate or if the Supreme Court
were to rule in Sound Transit's favor.

"There have been a number of concerns raised about this project, and the
letter concerns only one of the them," Swafford said.

King County Councilman Rob McKenna, a leading light rail critic, said he
hadn't had the opportunity to review Sound Transit's letter. When it was
described to him, McKenna said, "It sounds better than what they had
before. I'm glad to hear they're being more specific."

Though he did not predict what Istook would do, Sims said he hoped the
letter would finally silence light rail's critics.

The letter said that even if the courts were to lower the tax, Sound Transit
would still have enough to build light rail, without cutting back on existing
serve. The agency would first look at about $550 million in surplus funds
that had been slated for future improvements like a second light rail line.

P-I reporter Kery Murakami can be reached at 206-448-8131 or
kerymurakami@seattlepi.com



=PTP============================================

http://www.robinsonnews.com/wsStory1.html

West Seattle Herald
White Center News
2003/10/02

Monorail drills in West Seattle

  By Tim St. Clair

Drilling crews have been cutting holes in pavement and drilling deep into
the ground at various points along the proposed monorail route through
West Seattle.

Tall drilling rigs mounted on large trucks are being used to take core
samples at 18 locations. The drilling will provide soil samples and help
identify the geological layers underground, said Erin Fletcher, who heads
the monorail project's geotechnical work.


The drilling will also define the size of bodies of a hard substance called
glacial till. That is the solid underground footing upon which the monorail
columns will be attached. Once the crews hit gracial till, they keep drilling
to make sure it is at least 20 to 30 feet thick, Fletcher said.


Before drilling begins, utility maps are studied to see where nearby
underground electrical, gas, water and sewer lines are located. The
drillers first excavate a hole about 7 feet deep and 4 inches in diameter.

That takes about one day.

The next day the drillers continue boring down, taking a core sample
about every 5 feet as the drilling descends to a depth of about 70 feet
over the course of several days, Fletcher said.


When each hole is finished, powdered bentonite is poured in to expand
and refill the hole. Then the pavement is patched.


Each hole requires a separate permit from the Seattle Department of
Transportation, said Josh Stepherson, West Seattle representative on the
Monorail Project.


The geological data will help engineers and architect design the Green
Line.




=PTP==========================================

Washington Post
Monday, September 22, 2003; Page A23

Putting Politics Before Transit

By Fred Hiatt


Richard White, who runs Metro, says the Washington-area rapid transit
system is "on the precipice of a fiscal and service crisis." Without an
infusion of cash, Metrorail's future is one of declining service, crowded
cars, jammed doors and frustration -- the dissipation of a $9.4 billion
investment ($24 billion in today's dollars). But he is having a hard time
persuading people.

Partly, he acknowledges, that's because Metro doesn't feel like a system
in trouble. A lot of the bus routes aren't what they should be, and
escalators seem to be in a perpetual state of disrepair. But that's been
true for a long time. On the whole it's still a pretty nice rail network.

Partly it's that the people who should know better -- the politicians in
charge of funding Metro -- either don't believe or don't want to believe the
numbers. That's true most of all of Maryland's relatively new Republican
administration under Gov. Robert Ehrlich, who White fears has declared
war on public transit.

"The governor is saying he carried all but three parts of the state --
Montgomery, Prince George's and Baltimore City," White says. "Transit
riders didn't get him elected, and transit isn't where they're going to put
their money." Labor unions didn't support Ehrlich either, White notes, so
they're "going to go after our labor agreements."

"There are a whole lot of political reasons they're comfortable taking the
position they've taken," he says. "So I'm not surprised. . . . What I resent
is, I think some of the shots are cheap shots."

Doug Duncan, Montgomery County executive and a potential Democratic
challenger to Ehrlich in 2004, also says the governor has been anti-transit.
"During the campaign, he couldn't say enough nice things about Go
Montgomery," Duncan says, referring to his plan to relieve traffic
congestion through road-building and Metro expansion. "Since then
they've done everything they could to undermine it."

Which raises two questions: is Duncan right, and is he wise to be talking
about it? After all, the Maryland governor has a lot of power over how
much state money flows to Montgomery. Just last week Ehrlich and his
ally, former governor William Donald Schaefer, lashed out at a former
university chancellor who dared question, in a published letter, the
governor's budget cuts.

But Duncan said Montgomery loses either way. "They came to me during
the session" -- meaning the General Assembly session last winter -- "and
said, 'Keep quiet on transit and we'll help you' " with a revenue-raising
measure Duncan sought. "I kept quiet, and Flanagan testified against the
bill. . . . They're going to come after you if you keep quiet, they're going to
come after you if you speak up, so I'd rather speak up."

Which brings you back to substance. Robert Flanagan, who is Ehrlich's
transportation secretary, said during a recent visit to The Post that Ehrlich
is determined to cap spending increases at Metro to the inflation rate, not
for political reasons but because Metro spending is out of control -- there's
a "party atmosphere" on the Metro board.

White says the insult was literal; Maryland officials were offended to see
notices on a Metro bulletin board of a number of going-away celebrations.
But these were parties for longtime employees who had taken early
retirement as part of a cost-cutting program. "They had an average of 22
years of service, they're loved by their colleagues -- and he's saying it's a
party atmosphere," White said.

Maryland officials may find waste to cut at Metro -- underutilized bus
routes, overindulgent catering bills. More power to them if so. But no
amount of thriftiness will produce the $1.5 billion that White and Metro
chairman Jim Graham, a D.C. Council member who doesn't shoot from
the hip, say Metro needs for three essential tasks over the next six years:
maintenance on aging train cars and equipment, purchase of new cars to
meet growing demand and improved security from terrorist threats.

Because Metro, unlike many major systems, has no dedicated source of
tax revenue, there are only three places the money could come from. One
is the farebox, but riders already pay 75 percent of Metrorail's operating
costs. If you raise the fares so much that transit makes no financial sense,
the roads grow more crowded for everyone.

The second is the federal government, and Metro will make its case there.
But Congress isn't likely to ante up unless the locals do also. And given
that Virginia voters rejected a transportation sales tax increase not long
ago, and that Ehrlich in his first year raided Maryland's transportation fund
for non-transportation uses, that will be a steep hill to climb.

Paul Schurick, an Ehrlich spokesman, says the governor doesn't make
funding decisions based on who voted for him. Schurick acknowledges
that Metro has made a good case for its growing maintenance and
capacity needs and that Maryland needs some new source of funding for
transportation. But he also says that road maintenance and construction
need help too. "Nobody's going to get everything they want, but hopefully
they'll get what they need."

Metro isn't yet persuaded. "Our sense of looming despair," says White, "is
believed by our board not to be understood at all by the vast majority of
people out there."

fredhiatt@washpost.com




=PTP===============================================

[BATN]

Globe and Mail (Canada)
Thursday, October 2, 2003

No free road

The French, Spanish and even car-loving Americans accept that the
route to our transport future has a toll booth, says urban planner
Joe Berridge.

By Joe Berridge


The August electricity blackout gave Ontarians a taste of what
happens when a major infrastructure network grows too fast after
years of underinvestment. The transportation network may be next. One
way to save it would be to bring in toll roads -- a variation of the
user-pay strategies being proposed by Mayor Glen Murray in Winnipeg.

For years bureaucrats at all levels of government have been warning
about underfunding the road, rail and transit systems across Southern
Ontario. Yet the transportation demands are rising in the Greater
Toronto Area faster than in most other North American urban regions:
The annual number of kilometres travelled by auto in the GTA
increasing by 80 per cent between 1991 and 2001. Truck traffic volume
is up by 48 per cent. In the same period, public transit ridership
increased by only 2 per cent, thanks in large part to steadily
declining investment by the province.


All this at a time when the Greater Toronto Area and the booming
areas of Southern Ontario are adding 100,000 people a year. By mid-
century, the Toronto urban region will be the third-largest in North
America, with a population of 15 million.


Meanwhile, traffic is becoming impossible, transit unpleasant.
Unconstrained urban growth sprawls in search of an open road -- and
you ain't seen nothing yet. On the engineers' network diagrams, the
transportation system is already flashing red for overload during the
rush hours on a third of the major roads. Soon, two-thirds of our
freeways and half of our arterial roads will be gridlocked during
peak periods. We're at the tipping point.


Most observers agree that we must invest much more in the
transportation system, and manage urban growth to support transit-
and pedestrian-friendly movement patterns. However, getting people
into buses, trains, streetcars and subways, and getting them to walk
and cycle depends on convenient alternatives to the car.


it all comes down to money. Lack of proper funding is leading us to
bad investment decisions with the few resources available. The
province's apparent preference for a seemingly cheaper GO-bus rapid
transit (BRT) spine across the region over a light rail-based (LRT)
solution is an example: Buses move people very effectively, but don't
change the way cities develop. They don't structure employment and
residential development into the compact, mixed-use urban form that
must become the essential building block of our exploding metropolis.


By persistently underfunding the Toronto Transit Commission, we risk
turning people off public transit. Customer service worsens year by
year. And the once-proud TTC -- still the most efficient public
transit system in the world in terms of cost recovery per rider--
compares more and more poorly with that of other cities in terms of
modernization, expansion and ride quality.


Upgrading the Toronto region's transport systems will cost about $800-
million a year more than is now being spent on transportation by the
region's governments. There's little sign of that changing. The
provincial government's priorities are health and education; Ottawa
is mostly interested in funding pet projects such as airport links
and high-speed trains. Waiting for big funding from those governments
guarantees gridlock.


if we want decent roads and transit, we the users are going to have
to pay for them. One potential revenue stream is big enough to do the
job: We must charge drivers to use the highway system. We do so
already on Highway 407, a private toll road. The Americans already
use their EZ-Pass charge-card system, which extends across the
highways, bridges and tunnels of New York, Connecticut and New
Jersey. Most French and Spanish highways are toll roads. The British
are looking at a similar scheme.


With new road-fare technology, we can levy charges targeted at the
problem that causes gridlock -- too many single-occupant cars during
the rush hours. Reducing their numbers just a little would restore
free traffic flow. Higher charges at these times could divert drivers
to transit or to other times of day and still allow off-peak travel
at a lower rate or for free. The huge cash flow generated would be
enough to make public transit a viable alternative.


A charge of 7 cents per kilometre, charged during rush hours on the
Toronto and Hamilton-region freeways, would cost the average commuter
$45 a month, and yield a staggering net revenue of more than $700-
million a year. It's almost enough to close the transportation
investment gap, and if dedicated to a regional transportation agency,
could provide really good roads and public transit for our cities.
The system self-funds to take advantage of growth, rather than being
an insatiable demand on public finances.


Besides, it's a myth that road users already pay for roads. Roads
have an effective life of about 25 years and must be continually
rebuilt and expanded. Yes, car use is already extensively taxed. But
no, those taxes aren't all targeted at the road system. Governments
tax where they can and spend where they must. For a public utility
such as the transportation network, charging the real costs of
maintaining and expanding the system is the best policy.


Some say that highway fares will divert traffic onto local streets.
Another myth. The evidence suggests that this just doesn't happen to
any degree that can't be averted through clever traffic management.
Sophisticated road pricing can be selective and influence behaviour
by charging different amounts according to time of day, for cars with
several passengers, or for disabled drivers. By contrast, the much-
vaunted gas tax is a blunt instrument, applying to all drivers
regardless of time of day, or route, or the nuisance they cause.


A third myth is that road tolls are political suicide. London's
Mayor, Ken Livingstone, took a huge political risk this year in
introducing his "congestion charge," a £5 fee to enter central
London, with proceeds dedicated to transit improvements. The scheme
has been a great success; Traffic levels have dropped by 16 per cent;
bus use is up 14 per cent; traffic moves faster; London's streets are
once again a pleasure to walk -- and Mr. Livingstone's political
fortunes have never been higher.


Toronto's solution won't look like London's, but it too must be bold
and imaginative. The electricity grid breakdown reminded us that we
can't have something for nothing. For less than the monthly cost of a
cell phone, the region could have a state-of-the-art road and transit
system. And the city could be the envy of the world.



Joe Berridge, vice-chair of the Toronto Board of Trade, is a partner
in Urban Strategies Inc., an urban planning and design consultancy.



=PTP============================================

[BATN]

Washington Post
Friday, October 3, 2003

Senate Panel opposes White House's Amtrak Bill

By Don Phillips

The Bush administration's plan to restructure Amtrak ran into nearly
universal bipartisan opposition yesterday from a Senate committee, and
Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) said he fears Congress will continue to
subsidize the passenger railroad's losses while demanding no basic
changes in how it operates.


Federal Railroad Administrator Allan Rutter defended the
administration bill before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science
and Transportation. Rutter said he was incredulous that anyone could
think it was intended to dismantle Amtrak and dump financial
responsibility for passenger train service on the states, as several
senators then charged.


Over a six-year period, the bill would gradually end federal operating
subsidies for passenger rail, with the federal government picking up
50 percent of the capital costs. It would open up some Amtrak routes
to private operators and turn the Washington-Boston Northeast Corridor
over to a compact of states under a no-cost 99-year lease. The only
two people who had anything positive to say about the administration
bill were McCain and Transportation Department inspector General
Kenneth M. Mead. But both said parts of it were inadequate or
unworkable.


"There are obvious omissions in it, notably how much restructuring
will cost, and some aspects of the plan may not be entirely workable,"
McCain said. "Nevertheless, the plan is commendable for addressing
head-on the difficult issues of restructuring."


But after listening to committee members from both parties dismiss the
plan as a way to force states to pay for passenger trains, McCain said
it was becoming obvious that Congress will not deal with Amtrak's
structure but will simply "give them enough money to let them limp
along."


At issue is a six-year Amtrak reauthorization bill. Amtrak will be
funded in the current fiscal year by an appropriations bill now
working its way through Congress. The House has approved a fiscal 2004
budget of $900 million, the same amount President Bush requested, and
the Senate $1.36 billion. Amtrak President David L. Gunn has asked for
$1.8 billion.


Mead said Amtrak will need at least $1.5 billion just to "get by" for
the year. Even that "merely postpones the day of reckoning," he said,
"and that day is surely coming. Amtrak cannot continue to operate the
current system without, eventually and soon, addressing the backlog of
investment needed to bring that system to a state of good repair."


McCain was not the only member to complain that the bill contained no
estimate of how much restructuring Amtrak would cost. Administration
and congressional sources said the White House would not allow the
Transportation Department to include any financial numbers. That has
led to suspicions by the states that the federal government would walk
away from passenger rail, which in turn has stoked strong
congressional opposition.


"That is not what we are proposing," Rutter said.


But Mead said the lack of financial information "has weakened support
for the governance reforms in the proposal, particularly given the
current fiscal climate in the states."


Mead discouraged the idea of breaking the Northeast Corridor into
separate operating and infrastructure companies because "each company
will be responding to different incentives that may not be
reconciled. The result could be disruption of service and a decline in
on-time performance."


Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.), chairman of the subcommittee with
jurisdiction over Amtrak, led the chorus of senators dismissing the
administration plan.


"I fear this approach will be the end of Amtrak as a national system,"
she said.


Sens. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) and Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.) said the
administration plan would probably kill the Chicago-Seattle Empire
Builder, which provides the only public transportation to vast
stretches of rural North Dakota and Montana.





PTP 2003/10/04-A = CONTENTS

* Houston rail vote: 'total warfare has begun'
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 3, 2003

* LA's Gold Line: First month draws more weekend riders
   San Gabriel Valley Tribune Thursday, September 18, 2003

* Tampa-St. Petersburg rail transit link pushed
   Bay News 9 - Tampa Friday, September 19th

* Seattle: Options for LRT-SeaTac link to be studied
   King County Journal 2003-10-04

* $15.7 billion plan: 1/3 transit, 2/3 roads
   The Arizona Republic Sept. 18, 2003

* D-FW: Transit, road tweaking reduces congestion
   Dallas Morning News Wednesday, October 1, 2003

* Chicago: Current transport policies costing time, money
   Chicago Tribune September 20, 2003

* Pittsburgh avoids service cuts, fare hike with state aid
   Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Friday, September 19, 2003



=PTP===========================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 3, 2003

Rail foes demand inquiry

Dueling sides swap barbs over funding

By DAN FELDSTEIN

With exactly one month until the Metropolitan Transit Authority's rail
referendum, total warfare has begun.

When U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, found that Metro's predicted
flow of certain federal funds was 20 percent higher than his own, his first
move wasn't to ask Metro to explain, but to seek a criminal investigation
by the U.S. attorney in Houston.

On Friday, three Houston Democratic congressmen stood together, calling
Culberson's behavior "outrageous" and "silly."

Minutes later at a dueling news conference, rail opponent Paul
Bettencourt, the Harris County tax assessor-collector, stood before the
cameras and said, "Metro needs to show me the money!"

And for its part, Metro has yet to fully explain its projections, although
transit authority President Shirley DeLibero promised details would be
forthcoming, on Monday.

While the pro- and anti-rail forces will argue over many points of Metro's
light rail plans, this one involves how much cash Metro will really have on
hand for the next six years.

if Metro overestimates its income from such sources as sales tax and
federal grants, and goes forward with an expensive rail system, it will have
to shortchange its bus service and street work, critics like Harris County
Judge Robert Eckels contend.

if Metro cuts back on street work, leaving local cities with the onerous
task, property taxes might have to rise to cover the cost, they say.

in a telephone interview Friday, Culberson was asked why he wrote a
letter to the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Texas before asking
Metro itself for an explanation of its higher funding estimates.

"That was a private inquiry that I was not going to publicize," he said, but a
television reporter "asked me the right question" and thus he spoke
publicly about it.

Culberson made his first remarks Thursday evening. By 12:30 a.m.
Friday, the anti-rail campaign issued a news release with the headline,
"Cong. Culberson calls for federal investigation into Metro's finances."

The source of federal money at issue is called "formula funds" and comes
from the Federal Transit Administration. Each transit agency in the
country gets a piece, based on population, density and other factors.

The total pot of money and annual inflation factors are calculated in a
massive transportation bill passed every six years. The bill for the next six
years has been controversial, as usual, and sits unapproved in
Washington.

in the version put forward by President Bush, the inflation factor would be
2 percent per year. Using this number, based on what Metro got in 2003,
staffers on an appropriations subcommittee told Culberson that Metro
could expect $565 million from 2003-2009.

Culberson said FTA officials verified the math.

But figures from Metro indicate an expected $681 million.

Metro officials said several factors may explain the difference. Metro used
an 8 percent inflation factor, which it said was the historical average
increase under the last transportation bill.

Culberson insisted that 2 percent was iron-clad and the president wouldn't
budge, while DeLibero said that had never happened before -- Congress
always increases transportation funding from what the president wants to
make constituents happy.

At present, said U.S. Rep. Nick Lampson, D-Beaumont, Bush's bill is
worth $247 billion, the Senate version is $311 billion and the House
version is $375 billion.

"We know it will be in excess of $300 billion," he said.

But the inflation factor may not explain the entire $116 million difference
between Metro and Culberson. Metro officials said that their numbers
were for expenditures, not appropriations. A transit authority does not
have to spend the money in the year it is appropriated, and thus Metro's
first few years of predictions may include money that is already promised
to it.

However, Metro officials couldn't say for sure, saying their top financial
officer was on vacation. While DeLibero promised a full accounting
Monday, rail opponents charged that Metro simply didn't have a good
explanation. As the days passed this week, Metro looked flat-footed.

Lampson joined U.S. Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston, and U.S. Rep. Chris
Bell, D-Houston at a pro-rail news conference. U.S. Rep. Sheila Jackson
Lee,D-Houston, was in Washington but issued a statement in support of
Metro.

U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, also issued a statement saying
she would work to make sure that federal funds were available if Harris
County voters choose rail.

Bell said that by demanding criminal inquiries to grab headlines, rail
opponents were being "irresponsible, malicious and dishonest by design."

Metro will hold its referendum Nov. 4, asking voters to approve a $640
million bond issue for 22 miles of light rail by 2012. The authority also
pledges $774 million for road projects from 2009 to 2014 and a 50 percent
increase in bus routes by 2025.

Opponents believe the rail plans are too expensive and do too little to
relieve congestion. Pro-rail forces say Houston cannot build enough
freeway lanes to relieve congestion and other alternatives are necessary.

Culberson said that if exaggerating financial estimates before a public
bond referendum were not illegal, it ought to be.

"it's quite obvious they are desperate," said Ed Wulfe, a real estate
developer leading the pro-rail campaign. "They are behind in the polls,
and they are grasping at anything they can."

Rail opponents, who previously said Metro's sales tax projections were
also too rosy, said they were just trying to bring the financing facts to light.

"In my mind, they (Metro) have no credibility on this issue," Bettencourt
said.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2136495



=PTP==============================================

http://www.sgvtribune.com/Stories/0,1413,205%257E12220%257E16420
23,00>html#

San Gabriel Valley Tribune
Thursday, September 18, 2003

First month draws more weekend riders

Saturday busiest for Gold Line in first month, figures show

By Mary Bender
Staff Writer

PASADENA -- During the Gold Line's inaugural month, the light rail
system was ridden more often on weekends than on weekdays, according
to statistics compiled by the Metropolitan Authority.

The 13.7-mile line, which runs between Pasadena and Los Angeles, was
built with the hopes that train service would alleviate traffic on the Foothill
(210) and Pasadena (110) freeways, which the Gold Line roughly
parallels. Both freeways are gridlocked during morning and afternoon rush
hours.

Ridership figures for August show Saturday was the most popular travel
day among Gold Line riders, with 24,528 "average daily boardings,' the
transit industry's term for one-way trips.

Sundays came in second, with 21,652 boardings, according to the MTA,
which operates the Gold Line.

Monday-through-Friday statistics were calculated as a whole, with
average weekday ridership estimated at 18,364 boardings.

"It seems that it doesn't have the characteristics yet of a commuter line,'
said Simon Guevrekian, a systems manager in the MTA's service
performance analysis department, which gathers ridership statistics for
the agency's bus and rail lines.

"It seems to be more of a curiosity now. They're evaluating it,' Guevrekian
said. He speculated Gold Line riders are taking the train on the weekends
to explore where it goes, how to use it, and how they might incorporate it
into their regular commute.

A more accurate picture of the light rail's effectiveness will emerge as the
Gold Line makes the transition from a novelty to a viable transportation
option, he said.

"By January we can look at the data (and say) 'Now that the line is
stabilized, what patterns do we see?' ' Guevrekian said.

Summer ridership patterns are different than the rest of the year, when
prospective passengers are back at work and school, he said. Also, it
takes a while for a public transit system to lure drivers hesitant to leave
their cars behind.

"August is a vacation month,' Guevrekian said. "It takes any new system
six months to one year to be recognized by the community.'

Gold Line builders estimated the train would average 26,000 to 32,000
daily boardings. Jose Ubaldo, an MTA spokesman, said those figures
referred to the light rail's first year of operation.

Guevrekian said ridership on the Long Beach Blue Line, which began
operation in 1990, the Metro Green Line, which opened in 1995, and the
Red Line subway, which was completed in 2000, all grew over time to
their current levels.

First-month data on those rail systems wasn't available on Thursday.

"Although these (Gold Line) numbers are solid, reading too much into
them this early in the ballgame would not be accurate, because we only
have one month of data,' he said.

The Gold Line operates 196 daily trains, from 4 a.m. to 2 a.m. seven days
per week.

in calculating ridership, the MTA adheres to methodologies certified by the
Federal Transportation Administration. Sales from ticket vending
machines at Gold Line stations represent only one slice of the total
ridership.

Many rail passengers buy a monthly pass that entitles them to unlimited
rides on any of MTA's bus or rail systems.

Others purchase bags of 90-cent discount tokens rather than paying the
$1.35 fare at the ticket machines. Some use discounted passes available
to senior citizens, students and the disabled, or transfer from other bus
and rail lines, Guevrekian said.

Therefore, to accurately calculate ridership, MTA personnel ride the Gold
Line at all days and times to gather representative samples, Guevrekian
said.

"They count at each station how many people got on and how many
people got off,' he said.

-- Mary Bender can be reached at (626) 578-6300, Ext. 4456 or by e-mail
at mary.schubert@sgvn.com.



=PTP=========================================

[PTP NOTE: it would seem that "light rail" is used loosely in this article to
apply to a variety of guided modes.]

http://www.baynews9.com/site/NewsStory.cfm?storyid=24829

Bay News 9 - Tampa
Friday, September 19th

Sebesta promotes light rail system that would connect Bay area

is there another way to move people more efficiently than just in cars?

Bay area Senator Jim Sebesta says the answer to that question is yes.
Sebesta briefed representatives from Polk, Pasco and Hernando counties
about a 1990 law aimed at creating a light rail system for the Bay area.

The system would connect those three counties with Pinellas and
Hillsborough counties. Hernando County Commissioner Betty Whitehouse
says the system would be a winner for Hernando residents, since 25
percent of them already commute south.

"I do think you would see many people, especially the older population,
using the rail as a way of going into the Tampa Bay area for entertainment
and other things," said Whitehouse.

According to the law, the system and its operation will be paid for through
a fee that people who actually ride the rail will pay, and not through any
new taxes.

Sebesta says a light rail system could change a lot of people's attitudes
toward commuting.

[GRAPHIC]
Sebesta wants to hold a fourth meeting on the issue soon.

"If you can hop on a train, a light rail or a monorail, and zip to your office,
you can arrive fresh," said Sebesta. "Read or sleep on the train instead of
beating your brains out on the road."

Sebesta says the light rail law was long forgotten, so it's still in the very
early planning stages, but he says if all five counties go to work on it, the
rail could be up and running in less than four years.

Friday's meeting was the third one aimed at planning the light rail system.
Sebesta plans to hold a fourth in the near future, with representatives
from all five affected counties taking part.

[GRAPHIC]
The system would connect five Bay area counties.



=PTP=============================================

http://www.kingcountyjournal.com/sited/story/html/145291

King County Journal
2003-10-04

Study of Southcenter link to light-rail stop approved

by Jeff Switzer
Journal Reporter

Mini-cars on guideways high above the streets.

Moving sidewalks.

Shuttles.

A train.

Any of these might be used to connect Sound Transit Link light-rail stops
in Tukwila or the Sea-Tac Airport to Southcenter.

The agency's executive board voted Thursday to spend up to $200,000
for a study on the topic.

What the agency learns could be applied throughout the Puget Sound
region to better connect Sound Transit's linear transportation systems,
which are forced to bypass the heart of some population and job centers.

''Fixed rail may come close, but may not directly serve the heart of an
urban center, or geography may be such that a choice must be made to
serve one urban center but not another that is nearby,'' said Paul
Matsuoka, Sound Transit's planning and policy officer. ''We're using
Southcenter as our case study, but what we learn might have general
applicability throughout the region.''

Seattle's 14-mile, $2.5 billion Link light-rail project will run from downtown
Seattle to Tukwila, with promises to extend it 1.6 miles to Sea-Tac Airport
by 2011.

Still, plans show it will miss Southcenter, prompting Gov. Gary Locke to
request a connection to Link light rail. County Councilmembers Dwight
Pelz and Julia Patterson similarly pushed.

Southcenter is home to the mall and a 30-year-old concrete tilt-up
warehouse district that could be easily torn down and redeveloped.

A Sounder commuter rail station straddling Tukwila and Renton is
encouraging land owners to redevelop their warehouses. Connecting light
rail would improve those redevelopment prospects, Jamie Durkan, a
lobbyist for the city of Tukwila and Southcenter's Segale Business Parks,
has said.

The study of a Southcenter connection to light rail will look at how to
connect either Sea-Tac Airport or the Tukwila light-rail station at South
154th Street with the Sounder commuter station east of Southcenter.

it could be as simple as a bus shuttle, or as complex as a web of two- or
four-person cars on fixed guideways high above the streets, Matsuoka
said. It could mean a moving sidewalk, or surface light rail similar to the
underground shuttle at Sea-Tac Airport, Durkan said.

The results of a study are expected in about nine months, Matsuoka said.

Jeff Switzer can be reached at jeff.switzer@kingcountyjournal.com or 425-
453-4234.



=PTP================================================

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0918TransitTax18.
html

The Arizona Republic
Sept. 18, 2003

$15.7 billion transit plan endorsed

Valley officials' OK clears way for possible vote

Marty Sauerzopf

A $15.7 billion plan to improve freeways, streets and transit over the next
20 years won unanimous approval Wednesday from Valley officials and
business leaders.

The plan, bolstered by $480 million in last-minute street and freeway
improvements aimed at pleasing residents across the Valley, goes to the
Maricopa Association of Governments' Regional Council next week,
where it is expected to be approved.

it will then move to the state Legislature to authorize a countywide election
next May, when voters will decide whether to extend a half-cent sales tax
to help pay for the plan.

The plan includes a new freeway from southwest Phoenix to Buckeye,
funding for the South Mountain Freeway through the Ahwatukee area, a
new parkway to Williams Gateway Airport and double-decked express
lanes along a stretch of interstate 17.

The plan includes $2.3 billion for the light rail system, $2.4 billion for
regional buses and new general and carpool lanes on virtually every
existing Valley freeway.

The new street projects added Wednesday include intersection
improvements and additional lanes on a host of streets in Chandler,
Gilbert, Mesa and Scottsdale. The West Valley, meanwhile, secured
additional funding for Jomax Road in Surprise and money to purchase
land for widening Arizona 85 in Buckeye and Arizona 74 near Lake
Pleasant, and the extension of Loop 303 in Goodyear.

Wednesday's vote of MAG's Transportation Policy Committee belied the
often-confrontational nature of the past few months, during which leaders
from the East and West Valley debated the virtues of various freeway
projects in hopes of securing more funding for their regions.

That discord threatened to derail the plan early Wednesday when East
Valley leaders pushed to add $288 million in street improvements. West
Valley leaders were prepared to fight the effort but relented when more
than $192 million was added to purchase land for future westside freeway
projects.

By the end of the nearly four-hour meeting, the committee members were
patting each other on the back and espousing a plan they believe benefits
residents Valley-wide.

"Every segment of this region is receiving what they requested. Period.
End of story," said Tempe Mayor Neil Giuliano, chairman of the
committee.

Although the new street projects and land purchases added about $480
million to the transportation package, the plan is still expected to come in
under budget.

in midsummer, the overall transportation package was roughly $789
million over budget. But after recalculating revenue projections and
reducing the cost of several projects, MAG financial experts said
Wednesday that the plan was $94 million under budget.

The additional projects added Wednesday would be funded using the $94
million budget excess and a portion of the $1.7 billion contingency fund
that had been built into the overall plan. MAG transportation Director Eric
Anderson said the final plan still includes a roughly $1.3 billion
contingency fund.

Glendale Mayor Elaine Scruggs said she would have preferred to see
more funding for rapid-transit buses along Grand Avenue in the plan, but
overall she was pleased with the outcome of the months-long effort to
plan the Valley's transportation future.

"Given the realities we have to deal with and the way the population is
dispersed today . . . I think we did really really well for the West Valley,"
Scruggs said.

Chandler Mayor Boyd Dunn said each side of the Valley had to give a little
to make the plan work.

"I do feel the overall plan should have included more mass transit than it
does, but there has been compromise," Dunn said.

The mayors said they hope the unanimous vote will send a message to
the Legislature not to fiddle with the plan.

Giuliano said the Legislature and governor must approve the plan by Feb.
3 for the issue to make it on the May 18 ballot. Voters must extend the
existing half-cent sales tax, which was originally adopted in 1985, to help
raise more than $8 billion over the next 20 years. The balance of the
plan's funding will come from various state and federal transportation
funds.



=PTP==========================================

http://www.dallasnews.com/localnews/stories/100103dnmettraffic.49e47c
00.html

Dallas Morning News
Wednesday, October 1, 2003

Highway congestion levels off in N. Texas

Report finds it's still slow going, but delays aren't getting longer

By TONY HARTZEL / The Dallas Morning News

North Texas is struggling to hold its ground in the battle against highway
congestion, but local motorists still spend more than two days a year stuck
in slow traffic, according to a national study released Tuesday.

Congestion is getting worse nationally, but Dallas-Fort Worth traffic
remained relatively stable from 2000 to 2001, according to the Texas
Transportation institute's Urban Mobility Report. The study, based on
2001 data, also shows that the use of technology and public transit can
ease the crush on highways.

Figures for 2002 are not yet available.

"We're getting a hair of a breather here. If you travel around the region in
the last year or so, I don't think it's as bad," said Michael Morris, director of
transportation for the North Central Texas Council of Governments, the
regional planning agency. He argued that North Texas should use the
leveling off of congestion to start expansions on LBJ Freeway and Airport
Freeway.

The transportation institute, a research arm of Texas A&M University, has
published its Urban Mobility Report annually for two decades. In the
report's first year, North Texas motorists suffered a 7 percent delay for
driving in peak periods versus driving in free-flowing conditions. That
delay grew to 33 percent by 2001, the same level as in 2000.

Nationally, congestion grew at a slower pace in 2001 when compared with
traffic growth seen in 2000. The nation's economic slowdown is at least
part of the reason.

"A lot of cities from 2000 to 2001 didn't change," said researcher and
study co-author David Schrank. "What we are seeing there is the link
between the economy and transportation. It will be really interesting to see
what the 2002 numbers look like."

Even with relatively stable conditions, Dallas-Fort Worth motorists in 2001
spent 51 hours a year slowed behind someone else on their way to and
from work. That figure, based on a national average 25-minute, one-way
commute, ranks 18th in the nation.

in addition, congestion has become so prevalent that on average, every
man, woman and child in North Texas spends 36 hours a year delayed in
traffic. Only three cities – Los Angeles, San Francisco and Houston –
have worse per-capita delays.

But there is hope, researchers say. For the first time, they measured the
effects of public transportation, bus and carpool lanes and technological
improvements such as signal-light timing, traffic lights on entrance ramps
and the use of traffic cameras. Those efforts paid off by reducing
commute times by 4.3 hours per person a year in North Texas.

"While things are getting worse in general, things could be much worse if
departments of transportation and everyone else involved did not put
these treatments out there," Mr. Schrank said. "All these things make a
difference."

Mass-transit advocates nationally used the report to call for increased
attention to federal public transportation funding. Locally, mass transit's
role in reducing congestion was less than in some cities like Houston,
which does not have rail lines. However, the study did not include Dallas
Area Rapid Transit's light-rail extensions into Garland, Richardson and
Plano, because they opened in 2002.

"This says what we've said all along: We're one of the tools," said DART
board chairman Robert Pope, who added that only 41 percent of the
area's population lives in a city served by the transit agency.

E-mail thartzel@dallasnews.com




=PTP===========================================

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-
0309200184sep20,1,6595803.story?coll=chi-newslocal-hed

Chicago Tribune
September 20, 2003

Transit ills add up in time, dollars

By Virginia Groark
Tribune staff reporter

Chicago-area residents allocate more of their household budgets to
transportation costs than their counterparts in all but two other large U.S.
cities, and they could spend an extra 80 hours in their cars each year if
current transportation policies continue, a civic group said Friday.

The information is part of a 25-page report that Chicago Metropolis 2020
released to highlight key concerns it thinks a new regional transportation
task force should address in meetings beginning this fall.

The 11-member task force was created by legislation that Gov. Rod
Blagojevich signed last month. The group has until March 1 to assess
transportation issues in northeastern illinois.

The report presented by Chicago Metropolis 2020, a non-profit civic
planning group, and several other businesses and civic groups in Chicago
emphasized that seven agencies with a total of 102 board members are
responsible for land use and transportation policies in the Chicago area.
More often than not, they are focused on their specific area rather than
taking a regional approach that would help create a seamless
transportation network, the report said.

The task force will study the possibility of merging several of the agencies.

There also is no mechanism to coordinate transportation investments with
land-use planning, a problem that leads to the "planning equivalent of one
hand clapping," the report found. Consequently, too many people are
dependent on a car because they don't have any other choice.

The report said 17.4 percent of Chicago residents' household income is
spent on transportation-related costs, making it the second largest cost for
most families. Only Dallas and Los Angeles spend more.



=PTP========================================

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Friday, September 19, 2003

Port Authority won't have to cut service or increase fares

By Joe Grata, Post-Gazette Staff Writer

Transit riders can expect the financially troubled Port Authority to maintain
fares and service at current levels through winter and maybe longer.

Allegheny County and state officials have agreed to redirect $10 million of
highway money to public transit, as permitted in certain categories of
federal funding, to help plug a projected $19 million shortfall in the
authority's 2003-04 budget.

The money had been earmarked for the $80 million reconstruction of
interstate 79 between the Kirwan Heights and Parkway West
interchanges.

Because the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation's project isn't
expected to start for another year and last through 2006, the $10 million
being redirected for the Port Authority's use won't be needed for a while.

County Chief Executive Jim Roddey, former chairman of the Port
Authority board, announced the new funds at a news conference
yesterday.

The arrangement required the cooperation of PennDOT and the
Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission, the transportation planning
agency for the nine-county region.

PennDOT and the commission have the final word on where, when and
how federal transportation funds are spent. The commission's technical
committee is to approve the funding transfer today and the Port Authority
should start receiving the funds within two months.

Port Authority Chief Executive Paul Skoutelas, expressing thanks for the
collaborative effort, said $10 million "will help alleviate but not eliminate
our current budget crisis. We remain concerned about securing a long-
term solution to funding public transportation in the commonwealth."

For now, people who account for 245,000 bus, light rail, incline and
paratransit rides on an average weekday won't have to worry about the
base fare being increased by 25 cents to $2, or 20 percent service cuts
that could go as far as eliminating weekend, holiday and nighttime
service.

The $10 million will be spent for preventive maintenance or bus and trolley
repairs. The authority will transfer a number of mechanics' salaries from
the operating budget to the capital budget, reducing operating expenses.

"This is a short-term solution," Roddey said, to preserve public transit
caught in a series of fare increases, service cuts and subsequent ridership
losses, "a never-ending spiral that feeds on itself."

The reprogramming of funds will not delay the I-79 project, he said.

"We've been assured of it," Roddey said.

Steve Donahue, founder of the Save Our Transit citizens group, praised
the temporary financial fix but said the group's campaign will go on.

"We have to continue to fight for predictable, stable and reliable funding,"
he said.

The Port Authority board has initiated $5 million in administrative cuts and
is hoping the state will, at least, restore a 6 percent cut in operating
subsidies.

The $276 million operating budget faces $19 million in increased
expenses and reduced state assistance. The authority expects to pay an
additional $5 million in health care costs, $5 million in pension payments,
$3 million in union raises and higher diesel fuel, supplies, parts and
utilities costs.

The state's 6 percent subsidy cut of $4 million translates into a $5.3
million loss because of matching county funds. In addition, a special state
transit assistance fund is projected to bring in $5 million less this year.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Grata can be reached at jgrata@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1985.






PTP 2003/10/03-A - CONTENTS

* Bayonne (NJ) - Staten is. bridge eyed for LRT
   Jersey Journal Friday, October 03, 2003

* Portland: interstate Ave. LRT to open early, under budget
   The Oregonian - Portland 09/17/03

* Toledo eyes downtown streetcar
   The Blade - Toledo September 15, 2003

* Houston anti-rail pol seeks Metro plan criminal probe
   KTRK-TV ABC13 Eyewitness News 10/02/03

* Houston anti-railers launch TV ads against rail plan
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 2, 2003

* Houston: Private schoolbuses grounded for violations
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 2, 2003

* Ottawa suburb plans its own "bus transitway"
   The Ottawa Citizen  Wednesday, October 01, 2003

* Miami: Rail transit favored for city's NE corridor
   Miami Herald Sun, Sep. 14, 2003

* Seattle ed: Build all of monorail, or none
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER October 2, 2003

* Seattle letters: Monorail plan flaky, LRT better
   Seattle Post-Intelligencer October 3, 2003

* Seattle letters: Seattle's transit better than Portland's?
   Seattle Post-Intelligencer October 2, 2003

* S Jersey: Rail project builder linked to overruns in Boston's 'Big Dig'
   Camden Courier-Post Thursday, September 18, 2003



=PTP========================================

Jersey Journal
Friday, October 03, 2003

Bayonne Bridge is wished a happy 75th anniversary

Fall 1928 groundbreaking is marked by Port Authority

By Julia M. Scott
Journal staff writer

STATEN ISLAND - The Bayonne Bridge, arching 325 feet into the air,
looked proud enough to touch the sky yesterday as elected officials and
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey employees gathered to
commemorate the 75th anniversary of the bridge's groundbreaking on
Sept. 18, 1928.

When the bridge opened Nov. 15, 1931, the toll was 50 cents each way
for cars - or horses - and a nickel for pedestrians.

One remnant from that era, the shovel from the original groundbreaking,
happened to turn up in a Port Authority closet about a month ago, said
Gerard Del Tufo, manager of the P.A.'s Bayonne and Goethals bridges
and the Outerbridge Crossing.

Port Authority officials dusted it off, encased it in a wooden box and
showed it off as a symbol of the longevity of P.A. structures.

"It says something about our predecessors, the P.A. that built these
bridges and they're still functional today," said Ken Philmus, director of
tunnels, bridges and terminals for the P.A.

Philmus presented the historic shovel to Bayonne Mayor Joseph V. Doria
Jr., who said it would be permanently stored at the Bayonne Community
Museum, which is currently undergoing renovations.

"The Bayonne Bridge is an important part of the Bayonne community and
the metropolitan area," said Doria, who hinted at plans to extend the
Hudson-Bergen Light Rail across the bridge.

The bridge has the capacity to carry heavy rail, he noted, adding that the
city has had "very preliminary" discussions with the Staten island borough
president and New Jersey Transit officials about extending the rail line,
which will reach to 22nd Street in Bayonne next month.

Othmar Ammann, the bridge's Swiss designer, also designed the George
Washington and Verrazano-Narrows bridges. The year it opened, the
Bayonne Bridge was recognized as the most beautiful steel arch bridge in
the nation by the American institute for Steel Construction.

"it's not only a beautiful structure, it's a functional structure," said Philmus,
who explained how the bridge works: the arch is grounded in two concrete
abutments on either side of Kill Van Kull. The roadway hangs from the
arch, which allows it to expand and contract with the weather.

"You want to have a bridge with flexibility," he said. "it's a living structure."

Over the bridge's 75 years significant upkeep work has been done to the
structure, which spans 1.6 miles, Philmus said. The entire roadway,
including the pavement and the concrete underneath, has been replaced.
The bridge is painted as needed, and the abutment on the New Jersey
side is currently being rebuilt.

"The Bayonne Bridge has been one of the best bridges in Staten island,"
said Albert De Lillo, special assistant to Staten island Borough President
James P. Molinaro, alluding to the fact that the bridge has the least traffic
of Staten island's four bridges.

The bridge, which cost $13 million to build, handles more than 3.5 million
cars each year.



=PTP=============================================

The Oregonian - Portland
09/17/03

interstate Avenue rail line will open early

FRED LEESON

TriMet will open its new interstate Avenue MAX line four months early
next spring on a street that is showing new life for enterprise as well as
transit.

The 5.8-mile Yellow Line running between the Rose Quarter and the
Portland Expo Center will open May 1, ahead of schedule and about $30
million less than its $350 million budget. The original opening target was
Sept. 7, 2004.

"When you see a government ahead of schedule and saving money, it's a
great victory for TriMet and for the community," said Rick Krochalis,
regional administrator of the Federal Transit Administration, which
provided $257.5 million for the Yellow Line.

The new line is expected to attract about 13,900 daily riders at the outset
and grow to 20,000 a day by 2020. That compares with 48,000 average
daily riders at present on the eastside line and 28,400 on the westside.

Meanwhile, the interstate Avenue corridor traversed by the line is
beginning to show signs of economic revitalization that planners had
hoped for when they created a sprawling urban renewal district in 2000.

Fred Meyer has announced plans to spend $20 million rebuilding its retail
complex at interstate and Lombard Street, to be completed by the end of
2004.

in another coup for grocery-starved North Portland neighborhoods, New
Seasons Market will demolish an old Safeway building at interstate and
Portland Boulevard and build a new grocery store to open in 2006.

Fred Meyer announced that no jobs would be lost while it demolishes its
current two-store complex and rebuilds. New Seasons is expected to
provide about 140 new jobs.

Brian Rohter, president of New Seasons, said the new rail line figured into
the company's go-ahead decision because the site is adjacent to a MAX
platform. "Light rail is certainly an added benefit to sales forecasts for that
store," he said.

"There is definitely strong developer interest on interstate," said John
Southgate, project manager of the interstate Corridor Urban Renewal
Area.

He said the Portland Development Commission received "five good
responses" from developers interested in mixed-income and mixed-use
projects on a city-owned site at interstate and Killingsworth Street. A
decision is due on that site later in the fall.

Completion of the Yellow Line also appears to be prompting some talk
about extending the line to Vancouver. Vancouver voters rejected a
proposal for such a line in 1995 by a 2-1 ratio.

TriMet General Manager Fred Hansen and Krochalis said there have
been recent talks about light rail with Vancouver and Clark County
officials. C-Tran, the Clark County transit agency, is in the midst of a new
round of strategic planning.

Krochalis said the FTA is not necessarily pushing light rail as the answer.
"We encouraged them to find the right solution for Clark County," he said.

Hansen said he expects sizable numbers of Clark County riders to use the
Yellow Line even without a light rail service in Vancouver. He said there
are park-and-ride lots at the Delta Park and Expo light-rail stops and that
C-Tran buses will connect with the rail line.

Hansen said the Yellow Line's early completion will make it available for
riders during heavily attended events of Cinco de Mayo and the 2004
Rose Festival.

The latest MAX addition will extend the Portland area's mileage to 44
since completion of the original Banfield line between Gresham and
downtown Portland in 1986.

improvements in track-laying and street reconstruction technology helped
finish the project early. Reconstruction of North interstate Avenue itself
was finished in November.

Major general contractors on the project were Stacey & Witbeck, which
installed track from the Rose Quarter to Kenton, and F.E. Ward, which
built a 4,000-foot-long bridge from Kenton to the Delta Park station.

Knowing that work was running at least a half year ahead of schedule,
TriMet officials began thinking about an early opening about a year ago.

Hansen instructed drafters of TriMet's 2003-04 budget to include more
than $1 million to help pay for operations if the interstate line could open
early.

Early opening also meant accelerated training for new drivers and
mechanics.

Work on the interstate line began in November 2000 with utility relocation.
The Portland City Council that year approved an interstate Corridor Urban
Renewal Area that generated $30 million in local matching funds for the
project.

Other elements of the payment in addition to the federal transit money
were $25 million from TriMet and $37.5 million from regional
transportation funds.

Hansen said TriMet is talking with the federal agency about potential uses
for the $30 million savings on the interstate project. He said increased
security equipment is one possibility.

Current plans call for security cameras on passenger platforms at the
Delta Park and Expo Center stations. The surplus money could add
cameras at some or all of the other eight interstate stations.

Fred Leeson: 503-294-5946; fredleeson@news.oregonian.com



=PTP===============================================

The Blade - Toledo
September 15, 2003

Reviving downtown streetcar a possibility

Proposal would give city distinct image


By DAVID PATCH
BLADE STAFF WRITER

[PHOTO]
The last streetcar to serve Toledo traverses the downtown in January,
1949. (THE BLADE)


More than 50 years ago, the last of Toledo's streetcars were replaced with
buses, and before long the rails were yanked out of the streets or paved
over.

Now, a downtown transportation study commissioned by the Toledo
Metropolitan Area Council of Governments is on the verge of
recommending the streetcar's return as a practical transit mode and as an
attraction in the downtown area.

A downtown streetcar line is the most exotic proposal that a preliminary
version of the Regional Core Circulator Study finds to be feasible. More
elaborate ideas, like an elevated downtown "personal transit" system or
an aerial tram to international Park, are ruled out, at least for the
foreseeable future, because of cost and other considerations.

"We want to keep some of the elements of the old that were good, and
improve on them," said David Dysard, TMACOG's vice president for
transportation. The streetcar idea "fits right in with the idea of a downtown
renaissance."

Other possibilities outlined in the report include regular shuttle buses
between downtown and international Park, conversion to two-way of more
downtown streets and shifting part of the downtown bus loop to Monroe
Street instead of Jefferson Avenue.

The study will be the subject of public meetings tomorrow midday and
evening at One Lake Erie Center, Jefferson and Huron Street. The first
90-minute session will start at 11:30 a.m., while the second will start at
5:30 p.m.

"We would like to know whether the public thinks we're on the right track
with this study," said B.J. Fischer, account executive with Funk Luetke
Skunda, a public relations firm that is coordinating public involvement in
the study.

Wilbur Smith Associates of Columbia, S.C., and Parsons Brinckerhoff,
Inc., of New York are conducting the $890,000, federally funded study
intended to explore ways to improve transportation as a way to support
downtown Toledo's commercial and residential revitalization. A steering
committee with representatives from downtown business, planning, and
community organizations is overseeing the consultants' work.

Even if residential and industrial development continues to occur
predominantly in suburban areas, "the image we portray in our downtown
core has implications for our region," Mr. Dysard said.

The streetcar proposal, Mr. Fischer said, is a way to give downtown
Toledo an identifying transportation feature.

"You need something that's distinct for a downtown - something that's fun,
something that's different," he said. "It almost becomes an attraction in
itself."

The preliminary report proposes a route running from the Toledo Farmers'
Market passing Fifth Third Field, SeaGate Centre, COSi, and Government
Center on its way to a transportation center at Cherry Street and Buckeye
Basin Greenbelt Parkway.

Basic construction and equipment cost is estimated at $18 million, while
the transportation center, which would include a station, parking, and
maintenance facilities, would cost between $15 million and $17 million.
The study does not identify funding sources, but Mr. Dysard said
prominent consultants were hired to ensure that a good case could be
made for federal support.

"This is a project we want to actively pursue," Mr. Dysard said. "This is not
about having a pretty report we can look at on a shelf. This is about
actually getting something done."

"The initial finding that a historic streetcar system could work is exciting,"
said James Gee, general manager of the Toledo Area Regional Transit
Authority.

"The project itself would lead to economic development downtown," Mr.
Gee predicted. "Just putting the rails in place would be indicative of a
public commitment to downtown. Developers see that commitment.
Residents see that commitment."

Mr. Gee said he also supports the idea of better transit service across the
Maumee River, which now consists of a seasonal, privately operated
water taxi and TARTA buses that must use a roundabout route over the
Anthony Wayne Bridge because of weight restrictions on the Martin
Luther King, Jr. Bridge. Completion of King renovations is scheduled for
2005.

"The river should not be a barrier downtown," Mr. Gee said. "It should be
another amenity - an attraction and part of downtown."

Relocating the Jefferson Avenue portion of the bus loop to Monroe would
put it closer to Fifth Third Field and several new restaurants, and eliminate
confusion that now occurs because buses run opposite to Jefferson's
one-way, eastbound traffic, the consultants said.

But the report also proposes converting all remaining downtown one-way
streets to two-way, except for Erie and Michigan streets and possibly 11th
and 14th streets. Other downtown traffic pattern changes also were
considered.



=PTP===========================================

[PTP NOTE:  Dropping damaging political "bombs" in the late stages of an
American rail transit vote initiative has become a classic tactic of anti-rail
transit campaigners ~ in this case, US Rep. John Culberson, a key
member of the "advisory committee" of the Houston anti-rail effort.
Culberson has managed to wait at least 4 months before "discovering"
purported financial problems in the Metro plan and raising his sudden call
for an "investigation" by the US Attornery's office.  The intent of these last-
minute "bombs" is clearly to advance the "sow doubt" tactic that is central
to the strategy of anti-transit partisans.]

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/news/print_100203_local_metro.html

KTRK-TV ABC13 Eyewitness News
10/02/03

Congressman asks for probe into METRO's finances

By Kevin Quinn

10/02/03 - HOUSTON — Eyewitness News has learned that a US
Congressman has asked for a federal investigation into METRO's
finances.

Eyewitness News was first to report early this week that documents
obtained from the federal government indicate that METRO may see a
$116 million shortfall through 2009.

Congressman John Culberson says he's asked the US Attorney's office to
investigate METRO. He wants to know if a violation of federal law has
taken place. His Houston transportation advisor tells us METRO is trying
to make the public believe it's more economically viable than it really is.

"I don't know why the numbers are off," said Culberson advisor Edd
Hendee. "I can just tell you the federal government is very sure of what
they're going to write them a check for."

Hendee is the person Congressman Culberson asked to go to
Washington to investigate METRO's funding projections. Hendee's efforts
led to the revelation by the Federal Transit Administration that METRO
would see a $116 million shortfall over the next six years, that the federal
government won't give METRO all the money it's anticipating.

"Has METRO misrepresented their position? I will tell you they have not
accurately presented their position and I have been a party to that
verification," said Hendee.

METRO says its numbers are accurate, that critics are comparing apples
to oranges, though they can't specify how because their chief financial
officer is out of town. A spokesperson for METRO declined comment on
camera, saying there's been no misrepresentation on METRO's part.
Their figures are based on historical performance.

"The taxpayers have to foot the bill. There's no other source," said
University of Houston economist Stephen Craig.

Craig is watching the METRO situation closely, worrying how a lack of
funding for METRO might play out.

"The taxpayers are going to pay," he said. "We're either going to pay 35
years of interest if they borrow it on the back end or we're going to lose
our roads real early and pay property taxes right from the get-go"

To be fair, we should note that the congressman and his liaison are
against passage of METRO's $640 light rail bond next month. METRO
has said repeatedly that allegations questioning its finances are
strategically timed ploys to create doubt in the minds of voters about
METRO's financial health.




=PTP============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 2, 2003


Group launches opening ads against rail extensions

By RAD SALLEE

Coming soon to local prime time: Traffic noises followed by a hard-hitting
advertisement against the Metropolitan Transit Authority's proposed rail
transit extensions.

The 30-second spots, which will start running Monday and continue
through Oct. 12, are just the opening number in pro and con media
campaigns leading to the Nov. 4 referendum on the agency's 25-year
Metro Solutions plan.

The ad ends with "Metro's plan costs far too much, does far too little" --
the theme that Texans for True Mobility hopes will resonate with voters.
The well-funded group includes high-profile Republicans, such as U.S.
Rep. John Culberson and state Sen. Jon Lindsay, both of Houston.
Developer Michael Stevens and John Butler, a member of Metro's original
board of directors, are chairing the campaign.

The spots will appear on the ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox News networks, as
well as CNN, MSNBC and CNBC, said Chris Begala, political consultant
for the group.

"We've bought the four major networks pretty heavy," Begala said. "We
bought Jay Leno on Channel 2 and Nightline on Channel 13."

The group is drafting other anti-Metro rail ads, he said. "So far we are at
about $178,000 in buy including TV," a figure that only covers the first
week. But more will be purchased, he said.

"It will be an aggressive well- funded campaign. People feel strongly about
informing the public what a bad deal this is."

Metro spokesman Ken Connaughton declined to respond to the ad, noting
the transit agency is barred by law from political campaigning. Metro has
been running a $1.5 million "educational" campaign about its
transportation plan.

Paul Mabry, spokesman for Citizens for Public Transportation, the
committee promoting the Metro Solutions plan, urged voters to read the
ballot.

Mabry said the Nov. 4 ballot proposal, if approved, would authorize Metro
to issue $640 million in bonds -- not $8 billion as the ads suggest -- to
build light rail over 10 years, adding an estimated 22 miles to the 7.5-mile
line from downtown to Reliant Park. Metro would come back to voters
after 2009 to finance the next extension.

Voters would also be authorizing -- but not voting to fund -- an eventual 80
miles of light and commuter rail at an estimated $5.9 billion, along with
more buses and more roads, Mabry said.

"it's sleight of hand, trying to get voters to think they're voting on $8 billion
and just for rail," he said.

Begala said the $8 billion figure cited in the ad includes about $5 billion in
capital costs, $2 billion for operation and maintenance, and another billion
for debt interest and contingencies.

Begala added, "The ballot says 72 additional miles of rail. If you vote yes,
you're voting for 72.8 miles of rail, end of story. Once again, they're hiding
the ball."

Mabry disputed the ad's statement that the proposed rail system would
not relieve congestion.

Critics have argued that the system would carry only 1 percent of local
trips, but Mabry said those numbers reflect round-the-clock travel
throughout the eight-county metropolitan area. The rail and bus system
will carry a larger share of trips during rush hour in the area it serves, he
said.

"If you apply the same standard to the Katy Freeway, which will cost about
$2 billion to widen, it would carry about the same percentage of traffic," he
said.

The ad also says rail proposals were defeated in Austin, Fort Worth and
San Antonio and that Dallas' light rail system has "run out of money" and
is "asking taxpayers for an $18 million bailout." Voters in Austin and San
Antonio did recently reject rail.

Fort Worth voters in the early 1980s voted not to join a proposed regional
transit system including Dallas and Collin counties, but no referendum has
been held there on a local rail plan. Begala said the ad refers to a City
Council decision not to pursue rail.

Dallas Area Rapid Transit spokesman Morgan Lyons said the agency has
applied for $14 million in federal maintenance funds, but he denied this is
a bailout.

DART's sales tax revenues are down, he said, reflecting layoffs in the
telecommunications industry. But DART rail ridership was up 26 percent
through August 2003 compared to 2002, in part because the system has
been extended.



=PTP============================================

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 2, 2003

DPS slams the brakes on some private buses

Dozens of students left without ride after school

By JO ANN ZUIGA


Parents of dozens of HISD students had to scramble for transportation
Thursday afternoon after state troopers grounded private buses that were
in violation of state law.

The Texas Department of Public Safety early Thursday morning inspected
dozens of private buses en route to several schools in the Houston
independent School District, asking drivers for required documents.

DPS Captain Steve Sullivan said a citizen's complaint in August prompted
a crackdown Thursday on private buses in HISD. Sullivan declined to
provide specific details of the complaint but said it accused private school
buses of failing to have proper insurance and other credentials necessary
to drive on city streets.

Sullivan said he investigated and found 168 private school bus companies
in the Houston metro area that may not have proper credentials or [may]
lack driver training.

Sullivan said late Thursday afternoon he did not know how many buses
troopers stopped earlier in the day or how many infractions were found,
because that information was still being compiled. He also declined to
disclose the number of troopers used in the crackdown.

He said violations ranged from unlicensed drivers to lack of a state-
required liability bond.

Many of the buses stopped or grounded bear the names of the owners --
Muñoz Bus Service; Colunga; Duran, Aguilar -- written in black on the
yellow sides along with a telephone number.

Bus owners whose vehicles were grounded at Park Place Elementary said
they thought they were compliance with all regulations, saying they had
liability insurance requirements and city permits.

Some, however, were cited for not having a $5 million bond per bus
required of vehicles that carry 60 or more passengers. Owners thought
the bond applied only to long-distance bus carriers.

Carmen Tapia, who owns five buses and transports about 250 students
daily, said she would have to pay pay $5,000 a year per bus to get the $5
million bond.

"I cannot move my buses," she said. "I'm losing my business."

Her southeast Houston routes include Park Place Elementary; Stevenson,
Ortiz and Deady middle schools; and Milby and Chavez high schools.

Private buses like the ones Tapia owns are commonplace at public
schools, including HISD, which does not provide transportation to
students who live more than two miles from their schools. Many parents
then turn to individual bus companies.

in Thursday's crackdown, troopers patrolled the Houston area and if they
saw a private bus, pulled it over and asked the driver for proper
documents, Sullivan said. If the driver did not provide the documents, the
bus was still allowed to continue to school.

"We were worried about the kids being stranded and wanted them to
make it to school," Sullivan said.

The afternoon, however, meant headaches for many parents whose
children would otherwise be stranded at the school. HISD officials said
they had to hurriedly call parents in the afternoon to pick up their children.

"I barely got a call this afternoon to come pick up my son," said
Guadalupe Delgado, still dressed in her nurse's scrubs from her job at
Bayshore Medical Center.

Her 4-year-old, Adrian, stood outside Park Place Elementary dressed in
his school uniform and wearing a noodle necklace he made in school that
day.

"My mother-in-law takes care of him when the bus drops him off at home.
She can't drive and we live on the other side of the freeway," Delgado
said, nodding toward the busy Gulf Freeway nearby.

Veronica Garcia left her downtown office job at Waste Management to
pick up her kindergartner.

"This is why kids get stolen and raped, if they have to walk home from
school," she said.

But Garcia said bus safety is also important and she'd pay more to put her
children on a bus that complies with all regulations.

"I pay $9 a week each for both my children to be bused," she said. "I'll be
willing to pay more if it will keep them safe on a bus."

Metro bus driver Consuelo Garza, still in uniform, said she finished her
shift just in time to pick up her grandchildren after getting a call in the
afternoon.

"I have to get up at 3 a.m. to get ready for work and be there by 4 a.m.
We depend on these school buses for our children," Garza said.

HISD Spokeswoman Adriana Villarreal said the state agency did not
contact the district about Thursday's inspections. She said the district
learned of it from the media early Thursday afternoon.

Sullivan said DPS officials did not need feel they needed to to notify the
district about the inspections because they were not being done on school
property.

"We don't know how many children or schools were affected because the
parents contract directly with the private school buses," Villarreal said.
"We're worried about them missing classes if they don't have
transportation."

School board trustee Esther Campos, who said she was contacted by
community activist W.R. Morris about the inspections, said if the situation
escalates, it could have an impact on school funding.

"The district doesn't have jurisdiction over private buses, but we do have a
vested interest because for every child absent for whatever reason, the
district loses state funds," Campos said.

Sullivan said his office has met since August with representatives of bus
companies and explained the laws and the training and fees required.

"If something bad would happen to the kids on board accident-wise," he
said, "the parents should be concerned that the drivers have proper
training and the buses are insured, certified and bonded."

He mailed the companies a letter warning them that their grace period
was coming to an end, Sullivan said.

"We just decided to nip it in the bud," he said.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/2134439



=PTP==============================================

http://www.canada.com/search/story.aspx?id=698ba6d5-9bae-43b4-886f-
58877a41b422

The Ottawa Citizen
Wednesday, October 01, 2003

Gatineau to build own bus transitway to cross city,
link Ottawa by 2005

The transit system will include bike lanes and 10 new
stations, at least four with park-and-ride lots.

Dave Rogers


The City of Gatineau unveiled plans yesterday for a
35-kilometre bus transitway to link Masson-Angers in
the east and Aylmer in the west through downtown Hull
by 2005.

The transitway will connect to Ottawa via the Portage
Bridge.


The first phase of the $100-million Société de
transport de l'Outaouais (STO) system will be an
18-kilometre dedicated bus route next to a railway
line, to run from Lorrain Boulevard, near Gatineau
airport, west to Montcalm Street, near Les Terrasses
de la Chaudière federal government complex. The rest
of the bus system is to be on existing roads and bus
lanes.


The entire "Rapibus" system will be at street level,
unlike Ottawa's $500-million Transitway, which is
partly below-grade to reduce noise.


The Rapibus system is designed to ease traffic
congestion on Highway 50 and on city streets.


Gatineau councillors hope the bus network will reduce
air pollution and encourage new economic development.


"I am not sure that Rapibus will take cars off the
road, but it will certainly slow down the growth rate
of cars and will eliminate traffic congestion," said
STO chairman Lawrence Cannon, a Gatineau councillor.
"Every year Highway 50 becomes more crowded. This
project sends a strong and clear message to the
federal government that putting 25 per cent of
government offices on the Gatineau side will be much
easier because of a more reliable bus network. This
will be a big economic boost to Gatineau."


Construction is to start in 2004 and be completed in
2005, unless there are financing delays.


The bus route will run west on Alexandre-Taché
Boulevard and Aylmer Road to a station near the Aylmer
Hippodrome harness racing track, and east to
Buckingham and Masson-Angers. A secondary bus route
will be built north to Freeman Road.


The transit system will include bicycle lanes and 10
new stations, at least four with park-and-ride lots
for 1,500 vehicles. The bus, rail and bicycle route
will be about 10 metres wide.


Gatineau architect Pierre Cayer and a Montreal firm
that designed that city's Metro stations have designed
the Rapibus stations.


Mr. Cannon said the Quebec government will pay up to
75 per cent and a public-private partnership with a
bus company may help pay for the project.


The bus company is seeking a $30-million Transport
Canada grant for diesel-electric buses.


"This project is similar in many ways to Ottawa's
transitway, but it will follow the Quebec-Gatineau
rail line," Mr. Cannon said. "It will leave the rail
line at Montcalm Street, continuing west or along St.
Laurent and Maisonneuve and into Ottawa. There will be
park-and-ride stations on Lorrain, Labrosse, Montée
Paiement and the Casino.



=PTP=========================================

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6766421.htm

Miami Herald
Sun, Sep. 14, 2003


NORTHEAST DADE
County is set to take on boom area's traffic woes

BY DAVID OVALLE
dovalle@herald.com

Biscayne Boulevard snakes about 14 miles through northeast Miami-Dade
County, from the fringes of downtown Miami past the mall-gridlock in
Aventura. Drive up the boulevard, undoubtedly the region's main artery,
and it is easy to see why people worry about worsening traffic.

The skeletons of high-rise condominium buildings foreshadow waves of
new residents who have tired of suburban commutes. Signs of
redevelopment -- Starbucks, Home Depot, Office Depot -- have popped
up.

Yet, public transportation here is still too weak to ease congestion.

''The buses move like turtles,'' said Noemi Baldeom, 42, as she waited for
a Metrobus on Biscayne Boulevard at Northeast 79th Street. ''They never
come on time, it's horrible.''

Frustrated northeast Miami-Dade commuters like Baldeom were among
the targets of the campaign for the half-penny transit tax, which voters
approved last year to overhaul the county's transportation system.

Now, the county is about to focus on their concerns. In the next couple of
weeks, its Office of Public Transportation Management will commission a
study to examine ways to improve mass transit along the northeast
corridor, along the Florida East Coast Railway tracks and Biscayne
Boulevard.

The study's recommendations -- whether expanding Metrorail or Tri-Rail,
introducing a lighter rail system or just expanding bus service -- are
probably about two years away.

But most agree that public transportation must be addressed in northeast
Miami-Dade, arguably the most urban and diverse region of the county.

''it's an area that is prime for the next phase of major development,'' said
Clark Turner, the city of Miami's director of transportation administration.
''it's the place where the activity is going to be taking place -- and it lacks
first-class transit facilities.''

Many transit experts and politicians, like Miami-Dade Mayor Alex Penelas,
and community activists interviewed by The Herald say they favor a rail
system along the FEC railway, which roughly parallels Biscayne
Boulevard.

Mario Garcia, OPTM's chief planning assistant, said rail is appealing
because streets will not be able to handle the expected flood of residents
in northeast Miami-Dade.

''I'm afraid we're going to be pushing the envelope with anything other
than light rail,'' he said. ''And even that may be pushing it.''

GROWTH AND CHANGE

Northeast Miami-Dade is roughly bordered to the west by interstate 95, to
the east by Biscayne Bay, to the north by the Broward County line and to
the south by the edge of downtown Miami.

The region's population, for years characterized by senior citizens, has
changed. It's bigger, for one thing: Between 1990 and 2000, the
population in an already dense area grew 9 percent, from 246,000 to
269,000 residents, according to census data.

The population of the area's white residents declined by 30 percent in that
time. Now, more families from Caribbean nations live in cities such as
North Miami and North Miami Beach.

Wealthier pockets, particularly hugging Biscayne Boulevard, continue to
grow as part of the ''Eastward, Ho!'' movement. Future large-scale
residential developments such as Biscayne Landing in North Miami and
Buena Vista in the Wynwood neighborhood of Miami are expected to
draw tens of thousands of people.

Already, population growth has strained Biscayne Boulevard.

Consider: in 1997, an average of 38,500 automobiles drove north-south
each day on Biscayne Boulevard at Northeast 79th Street, according to
state statistics. Five years later, that number had jumped to 48,000 daily.

''We're all in favor of public transportation, and studies in improvement
would be welcome,'' said David Treece, who heads a coalition of
neighborhoods and business owners in Miami's Upper Eastside. ''Now,
often, studies are just that, and nothing seems to come of that.''

indeed, northeast Miami-Dade has seen similar studies and efforts fizzle
in the past.

BACK TO THE TRACK

During the energy crisis of the late 1970s and early 1980s, the county --
aided by federal money -- spent about a billion dollars to build Metrorail.
Lines were slated to be built in northeast Miami-Dade.

One of the chief proponents of Metrorail then was now-retired U.S. Rep.
William Lehman, who hails from northeast Miami-Dade and chaired the
transportation subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee.

Despite delays and budget bungling, lines were completed from downtown
through southern Miami-Dade's expansive suburbia. But Metrorail never
made it to Lehman's home turf.

Support for expansion plummeted and federal dollars disappeared under
President Reagan, who dubbed Metrorail a ''billion-dollar mistake.''

County, state and federal officials buoyed by the half-cent tax now
maintain that the region will no longer be ignored.

OPTM planners are also launching a study to look at building a bus hub in
northeast Miami-Dade, which would include park-and-ride facilities, bus
pass sales, police substations and even retail stores.

Both studies will seek input from residents groups, the state and cities
such as North Miami, North Miami Beach and Aventura. The northeast
corridor study will include input from the FEC railway, Broward County and
Tri-Rail, the regional transit system that is interested in extending service
down the FEC railway.

''it's the most viable link toward regionalism,'' Mayor Penelas said. ''if we
can get that corridor established and encourage Broward to continue the
corridor, you've linked all the beach communities.''

Herald database editor Tim Henderson contributed to this report.



=PTP==========================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/142113_monomaded.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Thursday, October 2, 2003

Take a fast train over the silly path

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD

Does anyone remember the concept of a "seamless" transportation
system?

if so, they're not among those offering the Rube Goldberg scheme that
would have riders take the monorail from West Seattle only to get off that
elevated line, descend to the downtown bus tunnel to catch a bus to the
other side of downtown, get off the bus and ascend once again to the
monorail and complete the trip to the end of the line in Ballard.

First to pitch this silly scenario were former Mayor Paul Schell, Flexcar
director Neil Peterson and former Seattle Weekly publisher David
Brewster. Picking up and running with this odd ball now are commercial
real estate developers Greg Smith, Howard Anderson and Aaron Alhadeff.

No one wants to see the city torn up for a project that can't be built for the
money allocated. The Seattle Monorail Project's design-build-operate-
maintain approach requires that bids and revenues match -- before
construction starts.

if the potential bidders can't pledge to finish the job for the available
funds, they don't bid the project. If they can and they win the bid, the onus
is on them to complete the project on time and on budget, enforced by
massive surety bonds.

This approach is becoming the global standard for large public works
projects.

Seattle voters said to build a 14-mile, well-designed monorail if and only if
it can be done with the revenues pledged. Spending more would violate
the voters' trust, but so would building anything less.



=PTP============================================

Seattle Post-Intelligencer
October 3, 2003

Letters to the editor

Light rail technology allows use of the tunnel

it was interesting to read Wednesday's article "No monorail through
downtown, some urge" and to note the irony when the Metro bus tunnel
was mentioned. If the monorail were being built using light rail technology
instead, downtown wouldn't be a problem at all -- it would be able to use
the tunnel.

if the Green Line were built using light rail technology, it could use the
tunnel along with the central link light rail line being built by Sound Transit.
This would avoid the costly route duplication through downtown currently
being proposed. Furthermore, the light rail tracks being built along the
busway in Sodo could be used by both lines. When added to the savings
by not duplicating through downtown, more than three miles of duplicate
routes could be avoided (at the monorail's projected cost of $121 million
per mile, this would save $363 million). Also, only one maintenance facility
would need to be built instead of one for each system, saving even more
money. Also, the line could tunnel under the Seattle Center and Belltown,
eliminating controversy there while saving the existing monorail along Fifth
Avenue.

The businesses calling for ending the monorail at both ends of downtown
have it right. Why spend hundreds of millions of dollars to duplicate what
we already will have? Monorail technology is completely inflexible and
non-interchangeable with light rail or any other technology.

Why waste money on two completely incompatible systems? Dump
monorail now and replace the Green Line with light rail technology.

Jeff Hansen
Bellevue


it's not too late to pull plug on the monorail

if the monorail can't be built as promised, it should be canceled. This
project was conceived as an exercise in nostalgia for the good old days of
the Seattle World's Fair, found favor in the ridiculous notion there's
something democratic about ordinary citizens designing complex
transportation systems and won voter approval in large measure because
civic leaders were afraid to speak out against it. It's never made a lick of
sense.

The Puget Sound area needs a comprehensive, regional transportation
plan backed by an authority with the muscle to get the job done. This plan
must account for all the ways people and goods move between and within
the communities in the area. If a piece of that puzzle turns out to be an
elevated train from Ballard to West Seattle, fine. But you don't spend
almost $2 billion because you grew up thinking monorails were cool.

Gary Moresky
Seattle



=PTP============================================

Seattle Post-Intelligencer
October 2, 2003

Letters to the editor

Linking monorail pieces by bus fails the laugh test

The idea to break the monorail in two and link the pieces by buses is the
lamest idea since the light rail to Tukwila ("No monorail through
downtown," yesterday). Is developer Greg Smith downcast because
Portland just beat out Seattle for worst traffic? Smith says he wants to
raise money to fight the people's monorail because he fears the monorail
doesn't have enough money. Why not raise money for the monorail and
get it built?

Let's be very clear: Three times the people voted for the monorail. Three
times the people discarded groundless objections and lame ideas such as
these. Let's stop the foot-dragging, nit-picking, NIMBY whining and join
together to build the people's monorail.

Janice Van Cleve
Seattle


Numbers and modes of transportation tell tale

According to the Texas Transportation institute's latest report, rush hours
traffic in Seattle is better than in Portland (ranking 12th and eighth worst,
respectively).

Portland has light rail. Seattle relies on buses.

Donald F. Padelford
Seattle



=PTP=========================================

http://www.southjerseynews.com/issues/september/m091803o.htm

Camden Courier-Post
Thursday, September 18, 2003

Legislators urge probe of builder of light rail line

Firm linked to cost overruns in Boston's 'Big Dig' project

By RICHARD PEARSALL
Courier-Post Staff

Two Burlington County legislators on Wednesday called for the state to
investigate the contractor building the South Jersey Light Rail Line.

Assemblymen Jack Conners, D-Pennsauken, and Assemblyman Herb
Conaway, D-Burlington City, said the idea for the investigation comes
from Massachusetts.

A special panel there has been looking into cost overruns on the so-called
"Big Dig," construction of a highway tunnel beneath the city of Boston.

The Boston Globe reported Wednesday that the panel is planning to sue
the Bechtel Corp. to recover "tens of millions" in overruns on the $14.6
billion project.

Bechtel is the principal partner in the consortium that is building the South
Jersey Light Rail Line.

That consortium, South Jersey Rail Group, filed a suit against NJTransit
last year, contending it is entitled to more than $100 million above the
$453 million contract it signed to build the 34-mile, Camden-to-Trenton
line.

Delays and changes made by NJTransit added substantially to the
project's cost, the consortium contends.

With interest, land acquisition, preliminary design and other costs, the bill
for building the line is expected to exceed $1 billion.

The two sides are trying to negotiate a settlement of Bechtel's claims.

Also under way is an investigation into the origins of the line being
conducted by the state Attorney General's Office.

The administration of Gov. James E. McGreevey launched that
investigation a year ago.

Reach Richard Pearsall at (856) 486-2465 or
rpearsall@courierpostonline.com






PTP 2003/10/02-A - CONTENTS

* Houston: Metro chair defends transit finance plan
   KPRC TV News - Houston October 2, 2003

* Houston: Critics claim 2% funding limit rules out rail
   Houston Chronicle Oct. 1, 2003, 9:52PM

* Tacoma LRT streetcar ridership exceeds expectations
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, September 12, 2003

* Salt Lake: 'BRT', not LRT, to suburb?
   Deseret Morning News Friday, September 12, 2003

* San Jose: TOD on LRT line sparks pro & con
   San Jose Mercury News  Fri, Sep. 12, 2003

* Denver: Businesses now say LRT project fears unfounded
   NEWS4Colorado.com  Sep 12, 2003

* Sacramento launches LRT project to Folsom
   KTXL -TV FOX40 News September 12, 2003

* US traffic congestion reported to get worse
   Associated Press Tuesday, September 30, 2003

 * Sacramento has 9th worst traffic in nation, study says
   Sacramento Bee Wednesday, October 1, 2003

* Hub motor may boost bus performance
   New York Times October 2, 2003



=PTP============================================

http://treets.click2houston.com/svc/lnk.cfm?l=26334891&t=1


KPRC TV News - Houston
October 2, 2003

METRO Chairman Defends Light-Rail's Finances
Mayoral Candidates Weigh in On Metro issue

HOUSTON -- Claims made Wednesday put Houston's light-rail extension
at risk.

Critics said METRO grossly over-estimated the amount of federal money
it would need to complete the rail line, meaning taxpayers could pay the
rest of the bill.

However, METRO said its plan is on track.

METRO Chairman Arthur Schechter was bothered during a late
Wednesday afternoon press conference by the recent questioning of
METRO's accounting ability.

"All of this stuff on a daily basis is just a political barrage of garbage,
depending on how you want to view it," Schechter said.

Schechter is mad that County Judge Robert Eckels has questioned
METRO's math.

Eckels said that METRO's sales tax numbers were inflated to win the
people's vote in November.

Schechter disagrees.

"I am extremely confident in these numbers," the METRO chairman said.
"I don't think anyone is lying -- that is kind of a harsh word. But I will say
this, I think that those who want to criticize are selecting the numbers that
they want to use."

Eckels said he is using numbers given to him by the Federal Transit
Administration, which show that METRO overestimated its tax revenues
by $160 million.

"If these numbers are right and if METRO maintains its expenditures
levels where they are, they will be broke," Eckels said. "METRO's math is
a mystery to me."

Schechter told News2Houston that METRO will not go broke. He said
Eckels numbers might have come from the federal government, but they
came through Republican congressman John Culberson -- a man who
vigorously opposes the Metro rail plan.

Both sides said they agreed on one thing: the METRO issue is the most
important issue on the November ballot.

Mayoral Candidates Debate Metro issue

Houston's top mayoral candidates discussed the light-rail issue
Wednesday at southeast Houston's Trinity Church.

A few of the candidates do not support METRO's proposed $620 million
bond to accelerate the construction of the next 22 miles of rail.

Bill White and Sylvester Turner are backing the plan, while Orlando
Sanchez is against it.

"Transit administration is telling us that they have over-projected their
revenues," Sanchez said. "METRO's own financial analyst, Professor
Barton Smith, said they are over-projecting their revenues."

Turner said he is confident METRO can build the 22-mile light-rail
proposal with the numbers that have already been projected.

"The size of the bond issue was scaled down from the various numbers
and plans that METRO originally had because I and others pointed out
early, last March, that the numbers should be more conservative," White
said.




=PTP==========================================

[PTP NOTE: Coming late in the Metro Solutions initiative campaign, this
move by anti-rail lawmaker US Rep. John Culberson appears to be
another last-minute "bomb" designed to confuse voters and catch pro-rail
campaigners by surprise.  it is quite unlikely that the FTA has limited other
New Start urban areas to a mere 2% increase in funding over the previous
year.]

Houston Chronicle
Oct. 1, 2003, 9:52PM

Critics say Metro overestimating future funding

By DAN FELDSTEIN

Critics of Metro's rail plans released budget numbers today that seemed
to show Metro is wildly overestimating how much federal funding it will get
in the next six years.

The chairman of the Metropolitan Transit Authority called the attack
"garbage" as the debate over Metro's November bond referendum got
hotter.

County Judge Robert Eckels, an opponent of the rail plan, called a news
conference to highlight a packet of information from the Federal Transit
Administration and a Congressional committee. It had figures asserting
Metro was over-estimating its expected federal funds for the next six years
by $116 million.

if that were the case, Eckels said, spending on the proposed rail system
would leave nothing left for buses, carpool lanes and Metro's contribution
to local road work.

"The financing is more questionable at every turn," Eckels said.

One hour later, Metro board chairman Arthur Schechter held his own
news conference and said opponents were trying to create doubts about
the rail plan regardless of accuracy. "Politics. Pure politics.... It's just an
effort to be disingenuous and play political football," he said.

Critics have already questioned Metro's projections for its sales tax
income -- its largest source of money -- saying the figures were far rosier
than historical precedent would suggest. This time, opponents focused on
federal "formula" funding, a pot of money handed out by the FTA to all
transit agencies.

U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, a rail opponent, asked the FTA to
determine what share Metro could expect from formula funds. It
responded that while the bill laying out the formula for the next six years
hadn't been passed yet, it currently calls for a 2 percent increase each
year from whatever a transit agency was getting in 2003.

Staff on a committee on which Culberson serves did the math and
compared the results to Metro's own estimate, finding Metro's to be 25
percent higher.

"As you can see, FTA estimates show Metro overstated its projections by
over $116 million. I believe this over-estimate, along with Metro's lowered
sales tax estimates as well as its aggressive fare box recovery estimates,
raises serious concerns about Metro's credibility and its ability to build the
light rail system," Eckels wrote to Schechter in a letter he released.

Metro objected immediately and loudly, but couldn't respond in detail
because its senior financial officers who might explain the discrepancy
were out of town at a transit conference.

Schechter said that no transit formula bill had ever called for an annual
increase as low as 2 percent, and he didn't expect the current number to
stick. He also called the comparison numbers "apples and oranges."

The Culberson numbers were what Metro could expect to be appropriated
in each of the next six years, said Metro vice president John Sedlak. But
the numbers Metro provided were expenditure numbers, he said, which
can include money that is appropriated in one year but spent in a later
year.

Transit agencies have three years to spend their annual formula
appropriation. And Metro plans to spend money from previous years in the
first three years of its projections criticized by Culberson, Sedlak said.

He said he was not sure if that issue accounted for the entire discrepancy
between the sets of numbers.

it was possible that both parties were correct -- or at least had some
justification for their numbers. But there seemed little chance that they
would congratulate each other and apologize.

Metro will hold its referendum Nov. 4, asking voters to approve a $640
million bond issue for 22 miles of light rail by 2012. Also on the ballot, the
authority pledges $774 million for road projects from 2009 to 2014 and a
50 percent increase in bus routes by 2025.

Eckels sounded the theme of opponents of every rail concept since
Houston began regularly fighting over them in the 1970s -- he supported
rail, but just not this particular plan.

"I just think this is not the right rail plan for Houston. The financing is more
questionable at every turn," he said.

"The opposition has no plan," Schechter responded. "All they want to do
is keep the status quo, which hasn't worked for our community."

in the packet of information released by Eckels, he includes a letter he
wrote dated Sept. 24 asking Culberson to check on whether Metro had
over-estimated its formula funding. Culberson apparently forwarded the
request, and the chairman of a Congressional subcommittee responded
on Sept. 25 with the full set of data, saying it has been fact-checked by
the FTA.

Culberson's office could not be reached late Wednesday to explain how
the FTA and the committee were able to respond in detail to Eckels within
24 hours.


http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory2/2132200



=PTP========================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/139333_tacomarail12.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Friday, September 12, 2003

Tacoma light rail ridership exceeds expectations

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER STAFF

Tacoma's new light rail line has proved popular in the first two weeks of its
existence, Sound Transit announced.

The agency projected that the line would carry 2,000 riders a day by 2010,
but the 1.6 mile-line through downtown Tacoma exceeded that number on
eight of the first 13 weekdays that Tacoma Link was in operation. The
peak happened on Thursday, Aug. 28, when 3,230 riders hopped aboard.

"This clearly shows that people are ready to park their cars and take
advantage of convenient and reliable transit options," said King County
Executive Ron Sims, chairman of the Sound Transit board.



=PTP============================================

Deseret Morning News
Friday, September 12, 2003

Salt Lake helps fund Davis transit study

By Larry Weist

      BOUNTIFUL — Salt Lake Mayor Rocky Anderson ventured into south
Davis County Thursday to let the locals know that while he opposes the
Legacy Highway, he joins them in wanting more public transit from Davis
to Salt Lake City.

      Rocky is backing up his talk with a $10,000 check toward a $100,000
transportation feasibility study the Wasatch Front Regional Council will
conduct over the next year. The Utah Transit Authority will donate
$45,000 toward the study, the Davis Council of Governments, $10,000,
and the six south Davis cities will give $35,000.

      Anderson noted that in recent years he and Davis County leaders
have been on opposite sides of the Legacy Highway issue, but improving
transportation from the county to downtown Salt Lake City is something
on which "we enthusiastically agree."

      Although the corner of 200 West and 400 North, the southwest corner
of Bountiful Park, was so noisy that speakers were occasionally drowned
out during the press conference, Bountiful Mayor Joe Johnson said the
location was picked to show off 200 West and the possibility of putting
rapid transit buses on the street, which runs through Centerville as well as
Bountiful and passes shopping and recreation areas.

      Bus rapid transit, as it is known, is an improved version of bus transit
with buses having a dedicated lane and preference for moving through
stoplights, he said. Such bus transportation is similar to light-rail transit at
a fraction of the cost.

      Speaking just before Anderson, Davis County economic director Wilf
Sommerkorn said a Davis COG survey two years ago found 70 percent of
residents wanted the Legacy Highway as well as improved public
transportation.

      "We disagree on Legacy Highway," Anderson said. "As the 39th most
polluted area in the country, we need to make a major change in our
transportation," he said, adding having commuters drive with one person
per vehicle is bad for public health.

      The mayor said he agrees an alternate route for vehicles is needed
from Davis County into Salt Lake City, but "not one that devalues
wetlands. We want Davis County people to access Salt Lake City; we just
don't want thousands of cars impacting Salt Lake City."

E-MAIL: lweist@desnews.com



=PTP==============================================

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/6753546.htm

San Jose Mercury News
Fri, Sep. 12, 2003

Planning panel OKs Tamien high-rise

By Janice Rombeck
Mercury News

The city's first high-rise housing project outside of downtown San Jose
was approved by the San Jose Planning Commission early Thursday over
the objections of residents who say it's too tall, will cause traffic jams and
doesn't guarantee the neighborhood will get a badly needed park.

But housing and open-space advocates strongly support the Tamien
Place project, next to the Tamien light rail, Caltrain and bus station.
Advocates, including residents, say tall buildings in residential areas,
especially near transit lines, will help solve the city's housing shortage,
stop urban sprawl and provide more open space.

The unanimous commission vote on the 120-foot-tall project at the three-
acre Alma Bowl site at Lick and Alma avenues came at about 12:40 a.m.
after 3 1/2 hours of testimony and debate. The commission also voted to
uphold the environmental impact report that several residents and the
Preservation Action Council had challenged.

The city council vote is set for Sept. 30, with District 6 Councilman Ken
Yeager vowing to ''make the best case I can'' to persuade his colleagues
to vote against the project. Councilwoman Cindy Chavez, whose district
the project is in, favors the plan.

in the works for two years, the project by developer Barry Swenson would
provide 242 units, with 228 condominiums in two 11-story towers -- about
as tall as the Hotel De Anza -- and 14 townhomes along Lick Avenue.
Most will be sold at market rate with 48 units, or 20 percent, reserved for
moderate-income residents.

Commissioners approved the project, saying that it conforms with the
city's development goals, would revitalize the area and moves the city
toward putting housing near transit.

Commissioner Christopher Platten called the project a bold step. ''We're
the new city,'' he said. ''We're the future.''

The commission also sent a strong message that the city and developer
must help the neighborhood get a park.

''I thought the debate uncovered additional flaws to the plan,'' said
Yeager. ''The most revealing was that no one knows where the money
will come from to complete the park.''

Swenson would be required to pay $2.7 million to $3 million in parkland
fees, but that could go toward buying the land.

But Erik Schoennauer, speaking for the developer, said ''it'll contribute a
significant portion.'' And if the city and Valley Transportation Authority
agree on using nearby land for a park, the developer is willing to build a
park there, he said.

The height of the project was a common complaint from residents and the
seven neighborhood groups that oppose it. The council in 1995 approved
the Tamien Specific Plan, a master plan for the area, with a 65-foot height
restriction. But it was amended during a general plan review in 1998.

Some speakers believed they had been left out of the changes. ''Sixty-
five feet makes sense,'' said resident Tom Smith. ''Why was that
wholesale disregarded?''

But others spoke to the direction they say the city must go in the future.

''it breaks new ground for transit-oriented development,'' said resident
James Riley.

Autumn Gutierrez, president of the Washington Area Coalition, is
concerned about traffic and park development, but sees the project as
''the real beginning of momentum'' to revitalize the area.

Contact Janice Rombeck at jrombeck@mercurynews.com or (408) 920-
5944.



=PTP==========================================

http://news4colorado.com

NEWS4Colorado.com
Sep 12, 2003

Businesses No Longer Lamenting T-REX Effects


The T-REX construction project and its impact on business, described in
the story below, was a topic of discussion at a community forum with the
group South East Business Partnership. If you would like a forum in your
area, or if you have an idea for a community story, call CBS 4 at (303)
830-6477 or email community@news4colorado.com.

DENVER (News 4) - T-REX, Denver's massive transportation construction
project, is an inconvenience for drivers on interstate 25.

But while drivers face a slower daily commute, business owners in the
Tech Center feared T-Rex would flat out kill their business.

You might be surprised to find out what those same business owners are
saying now.

Two years into the project, many businesses in the Tech Center say
they've escaped the worst of the project.

Business at the Hyatt Regency Tech Center depends on good customer
service and easy access, the latter making T-REX a huge concern.

"There were a lot of questions about it going into it," general manager
Greg Leonard said.

Leonard worried not only about keeping his guests, but also about
keeping his employees.

"We took a very early proactive approach on what we did," Leonard said.
"(We) purchased bus passes for the employees got them thinking about
alternative modes of transportation."

But T-REX trouble never materialized.

John Lay with the South East Business Partnership calls the project an
exceptional success.

"Obviously, we were somewhat concerned early on, but it has worked out
extremely well, and I think we obviously we see the light at the end of the
tunnel," Lay said.

The light at the end of the tunnel is light rail, the final phase of
construction in the south corridor.

"A lot of the big work is done here," T-REX project spokesman Hunter
Sydnor said. "You're going to see continued work on the light rail bridges."

Leonard hopes the light rail lines will bring even more people to his hotel.



=PTP===============================================

http://fox40.trb.com/news/ktxl-
091203folsomlightrail,0,4304761.story?coll=ktxl-news-1


KTXL -TV FOX40 News
September 12, 2003

Project To Bring Light Rail To Folsom

FOLSOM -- Folsom and eastern Sacramento County are a step closer to
getting light rail service.

Friday was groundbreaking day for a project that will extend light rail all
the way to Folsom's historic downtown.

Supporters say light rail will provide a faster alternative for commuters
who are sick and tired of fighting traffic to get to downtown Sacramento.

The Folsom extension includes more than 11 miles of new track and new
stations at Zinfandel Drive, Sunrise Boulevard, Hazel Avenue, iron Point
Road and Historic Folsom.

The project will cost 230 million dollars and is expected to be completed in
the spring of 2005.

The light rail extension is partially funded by the Governor's transportation
initiative.



=PTP===========================================

[BATN]

Associated Press
Tuesday, September 30, 2003

Traffic Congestion Reported to Get Worse

By Tim Molloy

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- The average Los Angeles driver wasted 90 hours
- nearly four days -- in traffic in 2001, according to the annual
report released Tuesday by the Texas Transportation institute
 at Texas A&M University. Nationally, the
average driver spent 51 hours in traffic -- four hours more than five
years ago.


After Los Angeles, the San Francisco-Oakland area was next at 68
hours, followed by Denver (64), Miami (63) and Chicago and Phoenix,
which tied for fifth (61).


The price tag was $69.5 billion in wasted time and gas, according to
the study, which looked at 75 urban areas.


With a round-trip commute that normally lasts four hours, Lina
Martinez tries to make the best of her grueling journey.


The legal secretary studies business courses, listens to jazz and
Christian and motivational tapes and looks for the bright side of
spending so many hours in gridlock.


"You just do the positive thing," said Martinez, who spends three
hours each day in a bus and another hour in a car, even though her
home is only 37 miles from work. "In life you have to have some time
to think."


if there's one thing Los Angeles commuters have, a new study says,
it's time to think. And to scream. And to grip the wheel and stare
disbelievingly into the maze of gridlock.


Noreen Kazauchian, a Los Angeles bank employee, said traffic
regularly adds 20 minutes to her drive to work. She arrived 10
minutes late Tuesday after a half hour in the car, trying to unwind
with an easy-listening station.


"If there's no traffic I get here in 10 minutes," she said. "it
stresses me. I get mad."


Tim Lomax, the study's co-author, said public transportation, traffic
signals on freeway entrance ramps and other congestion-busting
measures have kept a bad situation from getting even worse. For
example, traffic signal coordination aimed at smoothing the flow of
cars, trucks and buses saved commuters 16 million hours, the report
said.


The study found some areas of the country where gridlock eased. The
average delay dropped for commuters in San Antonio; Fresno, Calif.;
and Pensacola, Fla.


But the report said more improvements are needed, including more
roads, additional bus and car pool lanes, and adjusted work hours for
commuters.


Consulting company Deloitte & Touche is among firms that allow
employees to adjust their hours to avoid rush hour. The company also
has satellite offices around the Los Angeles area where many
employees can opt to work to avoid the commute to the downtown office.


"Some people do come in late because they live far away and don't
want to deal with traffic," said spokeswoman Suzanne Thompson.


in response to criticism about its earlier studies, the institute for
the first time factored in improvements that cities are making, such
as traffic light coordination and ramp metering, as well as the
benefits of public transportation, Lomax said.


The researchers analyzed data from the Federal Highway Administration
and information from various state and local agencies to come up with
the rankings.



Associated Press Writer Jennifer C. Kerr in Washington, D.C.,
contributed to this story.



=PTP========================================


[BATN]

Sacramento Bee
Wednesday, October 1, 2003

Capital traffic 9th worst in nation, study says


By Tony Bizjak
Bee Staff Writer


Sacramento's regional roadways are congested a distressing 78 percent
of the time during peak morning and afternoon hours -- the ninth
worst performance in the country -- according to a national report
released Tuesday.


Time spent in traffic slowdowns amounts to roughly 40 hours, or a
wasted workweek, each year, report co-author David Schrank estimated.


The report, the "2003 Urban Mobility Study," was done by the Texas
Transportation institute , a research affiliate
of the Texas Department of Transportation.


Congestion, however, is defined by report authors as occurring when
speeds drop below "free flow" or 60 miles per hour on freeways,
Schrank said.


That definition of congestion is different than the one used by the
California Department of Transportation. Caltrans says freeway
congestion happens when traffic travels 35 miles per hour or less for
15 minutes or longer.


"Most people going below 60 miles per hour in an urban environment
still feel they are making progress, but below 35, you start feeling
you are going to be late," said Sacramento Transportation Authority
executive director Brian Williams, who prefers the Caltrans
definition.


A Caltrans report from last year showed the slowest average freeway
speed in Sacramento was 20 miles an hour during afternoon commute on
southbound interstate 5 from Richards Boulevard to Sutterville Road.


Also slow: interstate 80 in the Madison Avenue and Douglas Boulevard
areas and, in morning commute, Highway 99 north of Sheldon Road.


The Texas report  shows Sacramento's
congestion isn't as bad as other cities' when measured by hours lost,
Schrank said, ranking 21st among the 75 urban areas studied.


in terms of time lost, Sacramento drivers were better off than their
counterparts in Portland, even though the Oregon city also is
congested 78 percent of the time during peak hours. Sacramento fared
far better than the stop-and-go nightmares of Los Angeles or the San
Francisco Bay Area.


Los Angeles was worst, with 88 percent peak hour congestion. San
Francisco and Oakland tied with Atlanta and Washington, D.C., at 83
percent congested.


San Diego was sixth at 80 percent; San Bernardino rated 13th; San
Jose tied for 14th with Detroit and Phoenix.


Commute-time congestion has increased over the past two decades. In
1982, the commute was congested 33 percent of the time nationally. By
2001, the most recent update of the study, the national average had
increased to 67 percent.


Peak-period congestion in Sacramento during that same period
increased to 78 percent from 24 percent.


California and several other states assisted in the Texas report.


"A lot of the Sacramento area has some congestion, but it tends to be
lightly or moderately congested, rather than real intense congestion,
so the amount of delay isn't as high," said report co-author Schrank.


The current delays would be several hours longer if not for efforts
here and elsewhere to provide public transit, car pool lanes, highway
metering lights, coordinated traffic signals, and quicker methods for
clearing crashes from highways, the researchers said.


"Those treatments are having a positive effect," Schrank said. "They
are often quicker and cheaper than widening roadways or expanding
transit service, like building a light-rail line."


He added that such treatments aren't complete solutions; widening and
adding roads, as well as transit lines, are needed, too.


Downtown state worker Do Nguyen knows the situation firsthand.


He lives in the new Silver Springs subdivision near Calvine Road,
just north of Elk Grove. Despite the housing growth in that area, the
intersection of Calvine and Bradshaw roads is still a rural two-lane
crossroads.


Commuters idle in long lines there every morning, stuck for three or
more traffic signal changes before they can pass. That congestion is
part of what makes Nguyen's commute 45 minutes long.


"I'm not surprised," Nguyen says of Sacramento's No. 9 ranking. For
people in his area, he says, "If they could just add turn lanes there
and another lane on Bradshaw, that would be good."


it might be a wait. State officials, struggling with a budget crisis,
cut a billion dollars this year from the state funds to provide
congestion relief.


in Sacramento County, officials are expecting to ask voters as early
as November 2004 to extend a longtime county sales surcharge, due to
expire in 2009, for another 20 or 30 years.


The money would go toward building roads and expanding such public
transit services as light rail. Some money, however, could go to many
less costly traffic management projects.


With similar concerns in mind, the Sacramento Area Council of
Governments next month will step up its "blueprint" process -- an
attempt to encourage "smart growth" and transit-oriented development
concepts, such as more density and less sprawl in housing
developments, to accommodate the expected continued regional growth.



The Bee's Tony Bizjak can be reached at (916) 321-1059 or
tbizjak@sacbee.com



=PTP============================================

New York Times
October 2, 2003

WHAT'S NEXT

With a Motorized Hub, the Wheel on the Bus Goes 'Round

By MATTHEW L. WALD

MOST electric vehicles work by connecting the wheels to a motor. But
tomorrow a Dutch company plans to unveil a bus in which motor and
wheel are one, a refinement that promises more miles per charge and a
vehicle that is safer and easier to maintain.

The company, e-Traction, has modified a city bus as a diesel-electric
hybrid. It has a small combustion engine that charges the batteries, but
propulsion comes from two electric motors with tires attached that serve
as the rear wheels. E-Traction, based in Apeldoorn, the Netherlands,
where the bus will operate as part of the local transit service, predicts that
the system will more than pay for itself because diesel fuel consumption
will be reduced by 70 percent.

The idea of such a wheel-motor was first advanced by the automotive
pioneer Ferdinand Porsche more than a century ago. Many companies
have since tried to popularize such a motor, and a few are currently
producing them - including WaveCrest Laboratories, a Virginia company
that is using a similar motor to power a bicycle.

But plenty of technological and economic hurdles must be overcome
before such motors gain widespread use in transportation. "It is the
future," said James Worden, founder and chief executive of Solectria, a
company in Woburn, Mass., that has produced drivetrains for more than
100 hybrid electric buses. "Whether it is 10 years out, 20 years out or 30
years out."

Mr. Worden said he had so far not embraced wheel-motors like E-
Traction's because he felt that the underlying technology was not quite
ready. But he said he would stop far short of saying it would never work,
for fear that in 20 years, his comment would sound like a buggy
manufacturer's prediction circa 1900 that cars were just a fad and would
never replace horses.

E-Traction, which has already built a wheel-motor for a forklift truck,
claims that the time is now. For one thing, it argues that in mass
production, two wheel motors would cost no more than the large engine
and other parts that the motors would replace on a regular diesel-powered
bus. The prototype bus nonetheless cost $500,000, about two and a half
times the cost of an ordinary bus, said Peter le Comte, a spokesman for
the company.

The circular shape of e-Traction's motor is not unusual, but the basic parts
are reversed. Usually an electric motor consists of a ring-shaped part that
does not move, called a stator, through which a current runs, developing
magnetic forces that turn the shaft that runs inside it, the rotor. For years,
engineers have talked about building a motor in which the shaft is fixed
and the ring turns. If the shaft were to serve as an axle, and the ring were
to have a tire attached, the result would be a motor that serves as a
wheel.

Such an arrangement would have only one moving part, and would
eliminate the parts of the drivetrain, which transfers power from the engine
to the wheels. For example, it would eliminate the differential, gears that
allow a vehicle's wheels to turn at slightly different speeds when cornering.
With a direct-drive motor on each wheel, speeds could be independently
controlled.

Electric wheels would also be a simple way of making a vehicle four-wheel
drive. And if one wheel started to slip in acceleration or braking, a central
computer could determine that far faster than existing traction control or
anti-lock braking systems, advocates say, and make adjustments.

Those benefits could be approximated by any vehicle that used one motor
for each wheel. But the E-Traction wheel goes two steps further.

First, it squeezes into the wheel an electronic part called the inverter,
which changes the direct current from the battery into alternating current
for the motor. Converting the current elsewhere in the bus would require
running long AC cables to the motor, and such cables lose energy, said
Arjan Heinen, the inventor of the motor. Running DC cables from the
battery to the wheel and converting the power there to AC increases
efficiency, he said.

in addition, some electronic tricks can make the motor turn at speeds fast
enough to run the bus without gears, he said. The result is to drop the
gearbox, a source of weight and friction. Unlike vehicles with internal
combustion engines, most electric vehicles do not need variable
transmissions, but they do need a gearbox of some kind.

if something went wrong with the motor, with the inverter or with the chips
that control the motor, a mechanic could replace them all in about 25
minutes by swapping out the wheel, Mr. Heinen said. That requires
unscrewing 12 to 20 bolts, depending on the wheel, and disconnecting a
handful of cables, he said.

Yet Mr. Worden of Solectria said that one drawback in the bus design was
that the electronics in the motor were in direct contact with the road, not
protected like the rest of the bus is by shock absorbers. If the tire hits a
bump, he said, "It beats the living daylights out of any motor or
electronics."

He said the loss of the gearbox was a major benefit, if it could be made to
work, but questioned whether having the current inverter in the motor was
much of an advantage. Electric buses with inverters nearer the batteries
do not lose appreciable amounts of current through the AC cables, he
said.

Mr. le Comte said the real proof of the design's viability would be the
operation of the bus in Apeldoorn. Meanwhile e-Traction is also working
on a Mercedes Jeep borrowed from the Royal Netherlands Army and a
Range Rover. Both will have four motors, one on each wheel.







PTP Digest 2003/10/01-B - CONTENTS

* N Jersey: Fed grant fuels LRT links to Bayonne, Weehawken
   Jersey Journal Wednesday, October 01, 2003

* Westside MAX celebrates 5-year mark
   [Portland] TriMet News & info > News Room Thu, 11 Sep 2003

* Cincinnati: Regional panel OKs LRT in I-75 corridor
   Cincinnati Enquirer Tuesday, September 30, 2003

* Salt Lake: TRAX LRT to run later on weekends
   Deseret News Wednesday, October 01, 2003

* Salt Lake: Late-night weekend LRT okayed
   Salt Lake Tribune  2003/Sep/07

* NYC: Northern suburb eyes light rail
   THE JOURNAL NEWS [suburban NYC] September 5, 2003

* Miami: Bay Link LRT project hits Beach politics
   Miami Herald Sun, Sep. 07, 2003

* DC suburb BRT: 'Equivalent of Subway Service '?
   Washington Post Thursday, September 11, 2003; Page B01

* Seattle monorail: Councilman seeks ban through Seattle Center
   Seattle Times Thursday, September 11, 2003

* Seattle monorail: Council says says it's all or nothing
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Tuesday, September 16, 2003

* Minneapolis: LRT result of decades of effort, planning
   Minneapolis Star Tribune 09/07/2003

* USA: Worsening congestions wastes more commute time
   NBC Nightly News Sept. 30 [2003]




=PTP=====================================

Jersey Journal
Wednesday, October 01, 2003

$70M from feds to put light rail on the fast track

By Jason Fink
Journal staff writer

Nearly $70 million in federal funds have been allocated to pay for the first
phase of the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Transit System and to kick-start
the second phase, which will begin to come on line later this year.

At a ceremony yesterday in Newark, U.S. Secretary of Transportation
Norman Y. Mineta presented members of the state's congressional
delegation with nearly $19 million for Phase I of the light rail, which was
completed last fall.

The total cost of that portion of the line, which runs from 34th Street in
Bayonne to Hoboken Terminal, was $1.1 billion.

in addition, nearly $50 million was allocated for the beginning of the
second phase, which will extend south to 22nd Street in Bayonne and
north to Tonnelle Avenue in North Bergen, with two additional stops in
Hoboken and one at Port imperial in Weehawken.

That phase is expected to eventually cost $760 million and be completed
by mid-2005. The 22nd Street station in Bayonne is scheduled to open
Nov. 15.

U.S. Rep Robert Menendez, D-Hoboken, called the money "critically
important" and noted that New Jersey has the second highest transit use
of any state.

"This federal transit funding will help to reduce congestion and pollution
and encourage economic development," said Menendez, who sits on the
House Transportation Committee.

The funding announced yesterday was part of a $127 million appropriation
from the Federal Transit Administration. About $60 million will go to the
first phase of the Newark-Elizabeth Rail Link.

Officials began sending electrical current through some of the overhead
catenary wires that will be used along the Phase II portion of the line
Monday.

The third phase is scheduled to reach West Fifth Street in Bayonne and
the Vince Lombardi Park and Ride in Ridgefield, but those plans are not
certain.

Several municipalities in Bergen County have been lobbying for a light rail
extension and no final decisions have been made on what the complete
map will look like.

"There are other Bergen County towns that are at it with a lot of interest,"
said Desire Ramos, a spokeswoman for Menendez.

Jason Fink can be reached at jfink@jjournal.com




PTP=======================================

[Portland] TriMet News & info > News Room
Thu, 11 Sep 2003


43 million trips in 5 years for Westside MAX

Line turns 5 on Sept. 12

Since the Westside MAX Blue Line opened five years ago, 43.4 million
rides have been taken along the 18-mile segment. That equals 13 rides
for every person in the state of Oregon.

Since it opened on September 12, 1998, ridership on Westside MAX has
steadily grown, now averaging 28,400 weekday boardings. In 2000,
ridership on the line had already exceeded 2008 projections.

MAX system

TriMet's three light rail lines, including Eastside and Westside Blue Lines
and the Airport MAX Red Line, board nearly 80,000 each weekday.
Annually, they provide over 26 million rides.

970 trips around the world

Since 1986, trains on all 38 miles of track have logged more than 24
million miles, equivalent to 970 trips around the Earth at the equator.

Send comments about this page to webmaster@trimet.org
TriMet • 503-238-RIDE (7433) • Legal Notices



=PTP========================================

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2003/09/30/loc_wwwloc1ai75.html

The Cincinnati Enquirer
Tuesday, September 30, 2003

$1.8 billion I-75 fix proposed

Plan includes more lanes, light rail

By James Pilcher
The Cincinnati Enquirer


The committee overseeing a study of what to do about interstate 75
Monday overwhelmingly approved a combination of widening the
expressway in southwest Ohio and a new light-rail line from Covington to
West Chester.

The fix will cost an estimated $1.83 billion, but is supposed to eliminate
major rush hour traffic tie-ups 30 years from now.

Finishing up a three-year, $6 million study, the committee voted 27-1 for
the mix, which calls for four lanes in each direction and some areas
getting a fifth lane to reduce congestion. The light-rail system would offer
trains every three minutes during rush hour.

Four members, including the city of Cincinnati's two representatives,
abstained. The lone dissenting vote was Hamilton County Commissioner
John Dowlin.

The recommendation now goes to the full board of the Ohio-Kentucky-
indiana Regional Council of Governments, the area's regional
transportation planning agency. That board must approve the proposal as
part of the region's long-term transportation plan before any of the
recommendations can get federal funding.

The OKI board meets on Oct. 9 and could vote to adopt the
recommendations.

"This three years has been the hardest work I've ever done in one of
these, and I've been on a lot of committees and studies," said committee
chairman Sterling Uhler, a former Fairfield mayor and councilman.

The I-75 fix, with estimated costs in 2003 dollars, would require 23 acres -
much less than other wider highway options that were considered. An
exact cost breakdown was not yet available, but the light-rail line would be
just under $1 billion and the highway expansion would make up the rest.

The highway portion of the proposal could take 10 to 15 years to design
and build, if and when the funding is located. Officials said it would take
another study to pinpoint which areas would get an additional fifth lane.

A light-rail line would take as long or longer to fund and construct, given
Hamilton County voters' strong rejection last fall of a sales tax hike that
would have helped pay for a countywide system.

The recommended option was the only one of two that would remove
traffic jams at rush hour in 30 years, the study found.

The other was widening the highway alone to six lanes in each direction in
Hamilton County and five in Butler and Warren counties. But the highway-
only option was estimated to cost $1.6 billion, and it would have created
major disruptions. Officials estimated that they would have needed to
acquire and clear 160 acres and 103 structures to make way for such an
expansion.

The costs do not include $482 million Ohio is already planning to spend
on improving the design of I-75, which does not meet federal safety
design standards in many sections. They also do not include a potential
replacement of the Brent Spence Bridge, which could cost as much as
$750 million.

Cincinnati Councilman John Cranley said the city abstained because it did
not want to be limited to four lanes or even five in areas that carry more
traffic, especially the stretch of the interstate between the Ohio River and
i-74, which is already four lanes.

"I want to make sure that I discuss this with all of council and that we are
not putting ourselves at a disadvantage," said Cranley.

Some members of the committee complained that they did not get enough
data to make a fair comparison, including the Sierra Club's Glen Brand,
who also abstained.

"But the good news is that OKI continues to see that any solution for the
region's transportation problems must include passenger rail," Brand said.

Dowlin raised several concerns about light rail, citing data released by
anti-light rail proponent Stephan Louis Monday that questioned points in
the study. Dowlin also said more consideration should have been given to
a potential I-75 truck ban, adding that no short-term solutions were
offered.

Louis, whose release was strongly disputed by study consultants, said the
decision to press for light rail was "disappointing."

"They keep having this irrational pull toward the carrot that the federal
government keeps holding out for these pork projects," said Louis, who
led the campaign to defeat the light-rail tax.

Uhler defended the study, but conceded that OKI now has a difficult task
in fitting the proposal into the overall needs of the region.

"I think this is the best solution to a very difficult problem," Uhler said.
"Maybe this thing will hold up for 25 years."

---

E-mail jpilcher@enquirer.com




=PTP===========================================

Deseret News
Wednesday, October 01, 2003

TRAX to run later on weekends

Night life may benefit as trains go until 1 a.m.

By Brady Snyder
Deseret Morning News

Salt Lake City's weekend night life will now come with TRAX.

After months of lobbying by Mayor Rocky Anderson's administration, the
Utah Transit Authority has agreed to run light rail service to and from
downtown Salt Lake City until 1 a.m. on Friday and Saturday nights.
Anderson, along with his senior advisor D.J. Baxter, had begged UTA to
extend the hours it runs weekend trains along the north-south and
university rail lines.

"This later service will enable our downtown visitors to get home more
easily on Friday or Saturday nights, whether they live south of town or
near the university," Baxter said Tuesday.

Beginning this weekend, the last train to Sandy will leave Delta Center
Station at 1 a.m. That train will be followed closely by the final train on the
university line, UTA spokeswoman Andrea Packer said.

Previously, the last outbound train on both lines departed between 11
p.m. and 11:30 p.m. The later service will be on a trial basis for one year,
after which UTA will examine ridership figures and determine whether it is
cost effective to operate light rail service that late.

The major hurdle to running light rail until 1 a.m. was that Union Pacific
runs freight trains on the north-south line between roughly 1 a.m. and 5
a.m. But UTA and the city struck an agreement with UP to allow the 1
a.m. Sandy train to run on Friday and Saturday.

Baxter said the late-night runs will benefit those who are enjoying
downtown after midnight and employees who work late weekends
downtown. Besides potentially cutting down on drunken driving, Baxter
said people who use the late-night TRAX also won't have to worry about
parking.

The service also could give downtown businesses an economic boost and
lead to more businesses keeping later hours on the weekends, Baxter
said.

initially, Anderson's administration had lobbied for 2 a.m. service. But
other cities with service that late report there are few riders between 1-2
a.m., Baxter said.

E-mail: bsnyder@desnews.com



=PTP=====================================

http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Sep/09072003/utah/90426.asp


Salt Lake Tribune
 2003/Sep/07

TRAX to give late trains on weekends a trial run

By Derek P. Jensen
The Salt Lake Tribune

[PHOTO]
The day's last TRAX run leaves downtown Salt Lake City for Sandy
recently. That last scheduled train will soon be pulling out an hour and a
half later on Fridays and Saturdays. (Ryan Galbraith/The Salt Lake
Tribune)

    Phoenix doesn't do it yet. Neither does Seattle. But now Salt Lake City
is poised to join Denver and Portland, Ore., as a major Western city
offering light rail service beyond last call.
    Despite the city's reputation for staid nightlife, Utah Transit Authority
officials say Salt Lake warrants late-night train runs on the weekends. So
beginning Oct. 3, TRAX will shuttle people until 1 a.m. on Fridays and
Saturdays.
    "it's something a lot of businesses downtown have been advocating
since the inception of the line," said Bob Farrington, executive director of
the Downtown Alliance. "It helps those people who don't want to drive for
nightlife."
    Currently, the final TRAX cars pull out of downtown on weekend nights
at 11:32 p.m. The later hours will include both the north-south and east-
west lines, including the expanded route to the University Medical Center
station scheduled to open Sept. 29.
    The idea to extend the service nearly an hour and a half was hatched
by Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson more than a year ago.
    "One o'clock is going to be great. Two o'clock could even be better,"
Anderson said, adding he is thrilled the UTA is willing to make the change
for what will be a one-year trial.

    Orchestrating the late-night push was the mayor's senior adviser, D.J.
Baxter, who said public feedback clearly supported the move.
    "We received letters from people saying it is tough to ride TRAX if
you're going out to dinner or a play on the weekends because you can't
get home," Baxter said. "It seemed like an unusually early time to stop the
service."
    So, based on the Portland model, which sees significant late-night
ridership, Baxter sought a way to keep the trains on the tracks until early
morning.
    Blocking the plan was the fact that freight deliveries, operated by Utah
Railway Co., have the right of way on the tracks between midnight and 5
a.m. A close reading of the agreement showed the freight easement
applies only Sunday through Thursday, Baxter said.
    Operating late on Fridays and Saturdays (the final car will not reach
Sandy station at 11000 South until 1:40 a.m.) does not encroach on the
freight business, according to Barry Olsen, director of sales and marketing
for Salt Lake City Southern Railroad.
    "As of now, our customer base does not demand seven-day-a-week
service," Olsen said.
    in fact, the UTA has extended weekend TRAX runs multiple times
including during the Olympics and for arts and jazz festivals downtown.
    Paul O'Brien, the UTA's regional manager of rail, notes that, along with
Sunday service and increasing train frequency from 30 minutes to 15
minutes, the later running time is a logical evolution for TRAX.
    "Every time we have adjusted our service the ridership has been there,"
he said.
    An informal survey to gauge the interest of urban dwellers was
conducted by Farrington, who said the city has a built-in market with 5,000
people employed in the hospitality industry, many of whom work nights.
And then there are people catching a late dinner after Jazz games, those
going to bars, clubs and concerts, as well as visitors and convention
crowds.
    "When you combine all those segments, you're going to find there will
be a healthy number of people riding the train," said Farrington, who says
the current TRAX schedule doesn't encourage people to linger downtown
after an event.
    More than 15 percent of the downtown work force rides the train, he
said, while nearly 25 percent of special event crowds use public transit.
    Late-night service could also prove an economic boon, Farrington says,
as Salt Lake City sells the amenity when competing with other cities for
conventions. "That's another arrow in the quiver for selling the city," he
said.
    Transit officials had no cost estimate for the extended service but said
the fare to ride the late trains will remain the same.
    That is good news for University of Utah students, many of whom
endorse the change and say they will gladly ride the train back to the
dorms after a night on the town.
    Walking off the new Olympic legacy bridge on campus while TRAX
crews tested the latest train route nearby, Libby Shotwell said the later
weekend schedule will be a welcome change.
    "It kind of turns into a curfew," the student said. "For a late night out, i'd
ride it, definitely. It would be nice."
    With the addition of student housing downtown, Anderson said the
service will make it possible for students to survive there without a vehicle.
He also supports weeklong 1 a.m. service on the university line -- noting
that freight is not a factor.
    Salt Lake City police support the schedule change and encourage
those who are drinking downtown to choose the train over their car.
    "We would hope as many people as possible take advantage," said
Detective Dwayne Baird, who hopes the service makes a dent in DUi
arrests. "I don't know that it will make the problem go away completely,
but it may help."
    djensen@sltrib.com




=PTP=======================================

THE JOURNAL NEWS [suburban NYC]
September 5, 2003

Considering light rail

By CAREN HALBFINGER

Light rail — a sleek, contemporary version of your grandparents' trolley,
cable or streetcar — is being explored as a way to solve a 21st-century
problem.

The state Thruway Authority and Metro-North Railroad are evaluating
whether light rail can relieve pressure on the interstate 287 corridor, a 30-
mile stretch from Suffern to Port Chester that is often packed with
aggravated motorists.

A final decision about whether to repair the Tappan Zee Bridge or replace
it with a new bridge, a tunnel or a combination of the two is expected to be
made in December 2005. As part of that study, officials are considering if
the new span will carry commuter or light rail, dedicated bus lanes or
some other form of transportation. But light rail is already attracting
interest.

"Should it be light rail or commuter rail? I'm not sure which is the right rail,"
said Maureen Morgan, director of the East-West Rail Project, a steering
committee developed for the Westchester Chamber of Commerce.
Morgan is building a coalition of business groups, including the
Westchester County Association, the Construction industry Council and
Rockland Business Association, to back the idea of building a rail line
from Suffern to Port Chester. The coalition is leaving open for now the
question of whether the trains crossing the Hudson River should be
commuter or light rail.

The concept of light rail dates back to the 1880s, when cable cars ran
through the streets of Chicago, San Francisco, Washington, Kansas City
and Los Angeles. In 1889, the first electric streetcar line began operating
in Boston, where the "T" still travels many of the same roads, just as San
Francisco's trolleys continue to offer a time-tested solution to an age-old
problem: how to get around.

Today's light-rail cars can ride anywhere tracks are laid — in tunnels, on
elevated platforms or on the road. Like trolleys and streetcars, the cars
run alone or in pairs. Powered by catenary wires that draw electricity from
overhead cables, they can climb steeper hills and turn sharper corners
than commuter-rail cars.

To Morgan, the advantage of commuter rail, which is similar to Metro-
North, is that it can provide seamless connections among the region's five
north-south rail lines. Light rail requires separate tracks and power, so
riders would have to walk or take elevators or escalators from a light-rail
station to a commuter-rail station.

"You look to commuter rail when you're looking to bring people from far
out into a downtown," said Ron Fisher, the director of the Federal Transit
Administration's project-planning office, which reviews and recommends
rail projects for federal funding. "Light rail is best-suited, like a busy bus
line, to travel throughout the day. People going to work, shopping and
coming into downtown. It's a much more diverse travel market than
commuter rail. People would go to light rail, or bus rapid transit, in very
congested traffic."

Bus rapid transit is an express bus system that provides rail-style
amenities, such as faster, more comfortable rides, consistent trip time,
brief waits at stations, and accurate arrival and departure information. It
costs far less than light rail to build and has demonstrated similar
successes in several communities.

Still, light rail can be an easier sell. It offers tourists, commuters, shoppers
and business travelers a way to get around without cars by taking a form
of mass transit that people find more appealing than buses. Riders prefer
trains because they're accustomed to getting better on-time performance
from them. It's a familiar sight to see two buses arrive at the same stop
right behind each other — one late and one early. Railroads rarely have
that problem.

There are 26 light-rail systems nationwide, with 15 approved projects in
the pipeline for funding from the Federal Transit Administration. The
system is popular with developers because of the opportunities presented
by light-rail stations.

"Developers love it," said Morgan Lyons, a spokesman for Dallas Area
Rapid Transit, which has a 44-mile light-rail system. "We've had $1.3
billion in private investment along rail corridors. We've had a couple of
studies done that talk about the increase in property values. What the
developers are telling us is they like it because employees can get there.
We're getting a lot of office buildings, lofts and condos and some retail
right here around the stations."

in December, DART added 24 miles to its light-rail system, which opened
in 1996. The $1.8 billion cost was paid for largely through a 1-cent sales
tax. Today, DART has 27,000 daily passengers who pay $1.25 per ride,
Lyons said. The penny tax covers 89 percent of the system's $62.9 million
operating costs, while fares cover the remaining 11 percent, he said.

DART'S light rail was designed as part of a broader transit system that
uses high-occupancy vehicle lanes, buses and commuter rail to link 13
cities around Dallas, covering 700 square miles. Plans are in the works to
again double the size of the light-rail system, which is helping keep cars
off the roads — 57 percent of DART passengers own a vehicle. Road
designers who planned the expansion of the North Central Expressway
told DART that they built the highway with six lanes instead of eight
because of light rail's presence, Lyons said.

Since the examination of light rail's usefulness for Westchester and
Rockland is still preliminary, no detailed route maps have been fashioned.
But it is likely that if light rail crossed the entire 287 corridor, there would
be at least a dozen stops spread across the two counties, including at
Metro-North stations in Suffern, Spring Valley, Tarrytown, White Plains
and Port Chester.

Riders also might use stations near major shopping centers along Route
59 in Rockland and Route 119 in Greenburgh and White Plains. The
system also could run to Westchester County Airport, so business
travelers could take light rail to the airport.

"What else are we going to do?" Morgan said. "Are we going to keep
letting cars fill up? This is the only way we can go. We're already at
gridlock. We want full-length rail, either commuter or light rail.''

Communities around the country are evaluating light rail against heavy
rail, with 130 potential projects under consideration. They are competing
for $1.4 billion in annual federal rail funds. The busiest light-rail system in
the country is in Boston; San Francisco comes in second.

in third is Los Angeles, which has three light-rail lines. The oldest of the
three, the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Blue Line,
is 22 miles long and opened in 1990. With 33,135 average daily riders, it
has one of the highest usage rates for a single light-rail line in the country.

The newest light-rail system to open nationally is Los Angeles' Metro Gold
Line, which has 13 stations that stretch over 13.7 miles, from Pasadena to
Union Station. With an average speed of 45 mph, the Gold Line takes 35
minutes from point to point. Its cars spend 30 seconds at each station and
run every 12 minutes.

"it's provided an alternative for some people to avoid sitting in bumper-to-
bumper traffic,'' said Ed Scannell, a spokesman for the Los Angeles MTA.
"For people who do not have the use of an automobile, it's provided a
faster commute time over a bus."

Reach Caren Halbfinger at chalbfin@thejournalnews.com or 914-694-
5004.Reach Caren Halbfinger at chalbfin@thejournalnews.com or 914-
694-5004.



=PTP=========================================

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/local/6711193.htm

Miami Herald
Sun, Sep. 07, 2003

Bay Link project hits Beach politics head-on

BY NICOLE WHITE AND ANDRES VIGLUCCi
nwhite@herald.com

To planners and aficionados of city living, Bay Link seemed such a cinch:
A compact street-level train gliding across the MacArthur Causeway,
zipping tourists and commuters between downtown Miami and South
Beach, easing traffic congestion and cementing the region's urban
resurgence.

Best of all, it wouldn't cost either city's treasury a cent.

But proponents didn't count on one thing: The fractious nature of Miami
Beach politics, made even more contentious in an election year.

More than a year after the Miami city commission enthusiastically
embraced Bay Link, Miami Beach commissioners remain divided and
undecided about the $400 million light-rail plan on the eve of a hearing on
Monday that could bring it closer to reality, or sink it entirely.

The impending vote follows months of often bitter debate between vocal
pro- and anti-Bay Link camps -- some who say the proposed streetcars
will help vault Miami Beach to the first rank of world cities, and others who
see the rail project as the ruination of its unique charm.

Websites have been launched, full-page ads have cropped up in local
newspapers, and leaflets handed out on street corners, turning Bay Link
into the hottest issue in the Nov. 4 Beach election.

Yet only two of the seven-member commission have publicly stated their
positions on the question: Mayor David Dermer against, Commissioner
Simon Cruz for. Both are running for re-election.

On Friday, Commissioner Matti Bower, also up for re-election, wore a
silver brooch to sum up her position on the nagging Bay Link issue:
Etched inside is the word ''maybe.''

Privately, some commissioners have said their vote may come down to
which side can pack the commission chambers Monday.

Technically, the vote would at most decide whether Miami-Dade planners
embark on a detailed engineering study of the proposal. But county
planners say a ''no'' vote would essentially doom it, putting it behind a long
line of rail projects in other cities now seeking federal transit money. In
that case, Miami has said it will go its own way and build a light-rail system
on its side of Biscayne Bay.

On the Beach, objections to the train have run from the pragmatic --
concerns over construction disruptions or the look of the street cars and
the electric wire that feeds them -- to the conspiratorial. Some claim Bay
Link is a plot by Miami to steal tourists from the Beach.

CONSPIRACY THEORY

''I think the whole process has been a sham to benefit the lobbyists and
development interests of the city of Miami who are seeking to colonize
Miami Beach,'' said Mike Burke, president of a local pro-Dermer group
dubbed the Tuesday Morning Breakfast Club.

''I'm absolutely convinced it's the worst possible solution, it's not even a
solution. It's designed to generate fees for lawyers, lobbyists and
construction interests, '' Burke said. Dermer says rail is simply unsuitable
for the Beach.

WRONG TRACK

''We're a unique city, a barrier island. To put a track here is like trying to
put a square peg into a round hole,'' he said.

Supporters say they are baffled by the resistance, and complain critics
have deliberately misrepresented the project. They note the Beach was
built to accommodate streetcars, which circulated in the 1920s and 1930s.
And the city's own consultant concluded its density makes Miami Beach
ideally suited for streetcars.

Randall Robinson, a Beach resident and a leader of the pro-Bay Link
camp, says the facts speak for themselves.

''There are so many benefits,'' he said. ''it would allow us to get around
more easily, in comfort, with a level of reliability we don't have with buses.
And, imagine, people on the other side of the bay would be able to come
to South Beach, without their cars, and not have to look for a parking
space.''

Underlying some opposition to Bay Link is an old Beach fear: That a train
would draw the urban poor from the other side of the bay.

''Opponents talk about this train like it's a monster. It's disingenuous, the
idea that it will bring over people from Overtown. Are they stupid?'' said
Beach resident David Kelsey, an early naysayer on Bay Link who came
around once the benefits were outlined. ''We already have 600 buses a
day going back and forth. It's irrational and racist.''

Bay Link opponent Stuart Reed, an attorney who is a candidate for the
commission, dismisses claims that those against the trains are racist or
protectionist.

''That has nothing to do with it, we're not against people coming here, we
want to improve public transportation for the entire city,'' said Reed. ''But
the train is not the best way because it's expensive and would take years
to put into service.''

One thing is certain: Bay Link is far more than a parochial concern of
Beach residents.

KEY LINK

it would be among the first big transit projects to be funded by the half-
penny sales tax approved by county voters last year. The light trains,
which run on rails set into the street, would hook up with Metrorail in
downtown Miami, forming a key link in a planned rail system that would
eventually reach into every corner of the county.

Transit tax proceeds would cover half the cost of construction -- the rest
would come from state and federal sources -- and all operating costs.

The Bay Link plan was prominently featured in the campaign for approval
of the transit tax, and proponents contend that the nearly 70 percent ''yes''
vote for the tax on Miami Beach suggests the rail plan enjoys widespread
support there. A survey commissioned by the Miami Beach Chamber of
Commerce, which has endorsed Bay Link, also found broad support for
Bay Link.

Light-rail trains, including the compact streetcars the Beach is considering,
are common in European cities and are becoming increasingly popular
across the United States as cities like Portland, Dallas and San Diego turn
to them for alternatives to auto congestion and unpopular buses.

Dermer and other opponents have embraced a less-costly alternative to
relieve the Beach's traffic crunch: Rapid-transit buses that, like streetcars,
feed off electric wires, but would require minimal construction and no
tracks.

The commission could vote for such a plan Monday instead of the
streetcars. But experts say research has found that professionals and the
middle-class, who will happily hop on a quiet, sharply-designed streetcar,
typically shun buses.

''if you want a system that will take cars off the road, it can't be a bus,''
said Jill Strube, a senior researcher at Florida international University's
Metropolitan Center who has studied urban transit systems. ''A middle
class, yuppie-ish person will take rail. Buses have a bad reputation and
break down.''

On the Miami side, public officials see the benefits of Bay Link flowing
both ways.

GOOD FOR TOURISTS

Miami planners say it would link tourists and residents on the Beach with
Miami-Dade's new performing arts center, Parrot Jungle and the
Children's Museum on Watson island, giving them more reasons to stay.

''it's nice for tourists to be able to do more things, because it tends to
extend their stay, and everyone benefits,'' said Clark Turner, Miami's
transportation planner.

The streetcars would provide Beach service workers an easy way to get to
their jobs, and simplify the commute for Beach residents who work
downtown and now must drive -- while taking cars off the road, Turner
said.

in addition, Turner said, Bay Link will help Miami Beach lure the top-tier
conventions that now elude it because of a shortage of suitable hotel
rooms within a close radius.

Moreover, proponents say, benefits of streetcar systems are tangible:
HDR Engineering, a consultant hired by Miami Beach to advise the
commission, said every U.S. city that has built one has enjoyed rising
property values and lowered commercial vacancies along their routes
because the trains make it easier for shoppers to circulate.

Not doing anything, HDR concluded, would likely hurt the Beach.

But the report did little to sway opponents like Frank DelVecchio, a Beach
resident who launched a website called stopthetrains.com. Because Bay
Link would require traffic on cross-streets to stop as the trains approach
an intersection, he says the system will actually contribute to gridlock.

''it doesn't relieve traffic congestion and misses an opportunity for a real
improvement in transit convenience,'' he said.



=PTP===========================================

Washington Post
Thursday, September 11, 2003; Page B01

Columbia Pike Gets Bus Equivalent of Subway Service


By Lyndsey Layton
Washington Post Staff Writer


Bus service on Columbia Pike rolled to a new level this week, with more
frequent buses, new neighborhood feeder routes and better maps and
schedules, all designed to make the bus as convenient and fast as a
subway.

The changes, which were celebrated yesterday at a bus stop on the pike
by Gov. Mark R. Warner (D), are part of a plan to draw more people out of
cars on the heavily traveled road that spans 3.5 miles through Arlington
County between the Fairfax County line and the Pentagon.

"After the referendum went down, traffic didn't go away -- we still have to
address the issue," Warner said, referring to the defeat last year of a
sales tax measure that would have funded transportation projects in
Northern Virginia.

The state invested $1.9 million in the project, which is being marketed as
PikeRide, to pay for shelters, maps and technological improvements,
including a signal control system that will soon give buses fewer red lights
at traffic intersections and real-time signs at bus stops that will let waiting
passengers know exactly when the next bus will arrive.

Arlington County has added $1 million to its annual bus system operating
subsidy of $3 million to pay for 45 percent more weekday trips, 64 percent
more Saturday service and nearly double the amount of Sunday service.

"This essentially has Columbia Pike functioning like the Blue Line," Metro
Chief Executive Richard A. White said during yesterday's ceremony
marking the debut of PikeRide.

Columbia Pike is already the corridor with the heaviest bus ridership in the
state, where 10,000 people a day board fleets of buses run by Metro and
Arlington Regional Transit.

But county planners hope PikeRide improvements will attract an additional
1,000 daily riders each year and lay the groundwork for a light-rail line.

"We have a larger vision so that someday we may see streetcars running
up and down Columbia Pike," said Chris Zimmerman, who serves on the
Arlington County Board and the Metro board.

"This is a really big step. It makes a real difference to people."

At a nearby bus stop at Columbia Pike and Edgewood Street, a handful of
riders said the changes in the schedules and routes had complicated their
commutes. "The buses are late or inconsistent. The bus drivers don't
know the routes, and it's taking me twice as long to get to work," said
Chaz Crawford, 33, a program analyst at the Pentagon who was waiting
for a bus about 8 a.m. yesterday.

Lisa Perry, who also works at the Pentagon, used to take a single bus
from her neighborhood in Shirlington to her job. Now, because of the route
restructuring, she has to take two buses. "it's less convenient," she said.
"But I try to be flexible."

James Hamre, transit program coordinator for Arlington County, said
officials are closely monitoring operations and ridership levels and are
making changes to the bus schedules and frequency as needed.

One rider who welcomed the changes was Vivian Hughes, 53, who said
the added service on her express route to McPherson Square has meant
she has been able to get a seat on the popular route.

"it's very humane, very customer-oriented," Hughes said about the
increased service. "The service is so frequent, I don't have to wait even 10
minutes."

Although the additional service and route restructuring took effect Sunday,
it could be a year before the technological improvements -- the signal
control system and real-time bus information, for example -- are in place,
Hamre said.

in the meantime, Arlington officials are hoping the jazzed-up bus service
will attract residents and commercial development to Columbia Pike,
helping to revitalize an old thoroughfare. "If you know you're going to wait
no more than five minutes to a bus, you might decide to buy here," said
Paul Ferguson (D), chairman of the Arlington County Board.

After his remarks yesterday, Warner walked across the street to a waiting
Metrobus to oblige the gathered cameras. With a borrowed SmarTrip
card, the governor stepped onto the parked bus, turned and smiled.

Then he moved to the open rear door, stood on the top step and
beckoned other officials -- Zimmerman, Ferguson, White, Fairfax County
Board of Supervisors Chairman Katherine K. Hanley (D) and Rep James
P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.) -- to join him. Braced against a pole and leaning out
of the bus, the governor started to sing the Rice-A-Roni jingle, mimicking
the television commercial set on a San Francisco cable car.

Asked when he last rode a public bus, the governor paused. "I rode the
subway last year," he offered. He blinked. Then he said apologetically,
"They don't run buses where I live now."



=PTP=============================================

Seattle Times
Thursday, September 11, 2003

Resolution would nix 'NW Route' of Green Line

By Mike Lindblom
Seattle Times staff reporter


A potential route for the Green Line monorail through Seattle Center
would be scrapped under a resolution that City Council President Peter
Steinbrueck will introduce on Monday.

He opposes the "Northwest Route," which would curve north of the
international Fountain and exit the Center through Experience Music
Project. The Center is the region's premier civic gathering place and
should be protected, he said.

Tom Weeks, chairman of the Seattle Monorail Project, said his agency is
asking the council to wait until technical studies, including cost
comparisons of different alignments, are completed.

Other proposed alignments would go along Mercer Street north of the
Center, or Denny Way to the south.



=PTP=============================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/139802_monorail16.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Tuesday, September 16, 2003

City Council makes a monorail pledge

By KERY MURAKAMi
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

With questions surrounding the monorail authority's finances, Seattle City
Council members yesterday pledged not to let the project begin
construction without "substantial evidence" the entire 14-mile line would
be completed.

The move came after the Seattle Monorail Project acknowledged its sole
source of money -- the 1.4 percent Motor Vehicle Excise Tax increase
approved by Seattle voters in November -- is taking in less than expected.

"We're not going to let them do things like tear down the existing monorail
or tear up our streets if we don't have the comfort they're going to finish
the project," said City Councilman Nick Licata.

For the project to continue, the council must approve the monorail's route
and the location of its stations, and grant authority to build on city property
next spring. In addition to examining the project's finances, the resolution
also requires the council to hold public hearings on the final route and the
sequence in which the Ballard-to-West Seattle line is built.

The Building Owners and Managers Association and the Downtown
Seattle Association had wanted guarantees the authority would build the
ends of the line in Ballard and West Seattle first. They did not want
downtown disrupted until it became clear the authority could build the
entire line. But they backed off in return for the public hearings.

Licata acknowledged that the city may be sued if it denies the measures
the authority needs, given that the project was approved by voters.
However, Seattle Monorail Project spokesman Paul Bergman said the
council does have the power to deny permission to go ahead.

Bergman, though, said the authority will work through the financial
questions and the council would not have to block the project. He said the
authority supports the resolution.

The council yesterday also unanimously approved changes the monorail
authority needed -- including waiving height limits for stations in Ballard
and West Seattle. The council also waived required setbacks, which
would have left a 20-foot gap between the edge of the platform and the
monorail tracks. The land code changes also streamlined the city's
permitting process for the project.

The Building Owners and Managers Association and the Downtown
Seattle Association had initially opposed the changes because of the
authority's financial questions. But they backed the changes in return for
the assurances in the resolution.


P-I reporter Kery Murakami can be reached at 206-448-8131 or
kerymurakami@seattlepi.com



=PTP===========================================

Minneapolis Star Tribune
09/07/2003

Light rail project now on track, after decades of planning

Travis Reed
Associated Press

Follow the winding debate over light rail in Minnesota back far enough and
you come to a plastic, metal and glue model about the size of a desk,
sitting on a plank in George isaacs' unfinished basement in Roseville.

isaacs, a retired engineer who never worked in the rail industry, built the
model 23 years ago as part of his crusade to bring commuter trains back
to Minneapolis.

The 81-year-old has made his case to more than 200 organizations since
1975 and ridden and photographed rail systems all over the world.

Finally, his vision is coming to fruition. Next spring, the first train in a $715
million rail project will be running.

The rail line connecting the Mall of America, Minneapolis-St. Paul
international Airport and downtown Minneapolis is scheduled to rumble
along the same route laid out in the basement model isaacs built in 1980.

The fight wasn't easy for isaacs and other light rail proponents. Critics of
the project -- and there are plenty -- have long argued that buses can
move people and ease traffic congestion as effectively for much less
money.

But now, many of the people who tried to block the construction of light
rail find themselves reluctantly in isaacs' corner.

"Now that we are committed to going forward with the project, we want it
to be as successful as possible," said Phil Krinkie, a state representative
who has been one of light rail's staunchest opponents.

For many years, it seemed the trains would never run. The state
commissioned one planning study after another from the early 1980s until
the Legislature banned public funding for light rail in 1985.

But lawmakers erased that regulation in 1987, and light rail crept back into
public debate with continued planning. It was another decade before then-
Gov. Arne Carlson secured half of the state's $100 million contribution for
the line.

Former Gov. Jesse Ventura made getting the final legislation passed one
of his top priorities in 2000, ultimately signing an income tax rate cut in
exchange for the Republican-controlled House's green-lighting light rail.

But Gov. Tim Pawlenty opposed the project as a state legislator, and still
hasn't warmed to it, making expansion unlikely for at least the next few
years.

Rail advocates acknowledge the track they've laid down the Hiawatha
corridor isn't necessarily in the place it's most needed. But it was cheaper
to build than any other potential line because it was already owned by the
public for transportation development.

Lawmakers will closely monitor the success of the initial 11.6-mile track to
determine whether to connect more lines to it. Pawlenty reluctantly
approved $7 million this year to cover part of the estimated $16 million
yearly operating cost, leaving rider fees and local governments to make
up the rest.

"Anything that's as expensive as light rail needs to have fairly broad-based
public support," said Peter Bell, chairman of the Metropolitan Council. "If
the public says this is something that makes sense, then we'll support it.

"The customer will ultimately decide, 'Do we have more lines?' "

Part of the problem with getting light rail off the ground is that it requires
the cooperation of several agencies at the state, local and federal levels.
In  this case, at least seven were involved.

The Metropolitan Council -- which played a hefty role in bringing light rail
to Minneapolis -- is now composed of people much less supportive of it.

But Bell, a Pawlenty appointee, and others who have opposed the line say
they're committed to at least making the first leg succeed.

As with most rail projects, the federal government picked up roughly half
of the total cost -- $340 million in this case -- and stipulated that the
money must be repaid if the line isn't built roughly on time and on budget.

So far, no city to undertake a rail project has had to worry about that.

With the exception of Buffalo, N.Y., most other U.S. cities to open light rail
lines have built additional spokes onto their systems or expanded their car
fleet to accommodate additional passengers.

Minneapolis, Atlanta and Detroit are the only three of the largest 15
metropolitan areas in the United States that won't have a train system by
January.

The Twin Cities' downtowns, University of Minnesota and many corporate
offices in the suburbs are widely considered key to the state's economy.
They are also the areas with the worst traffic congestion.

"What would stop growth there would be that you can't get to them
anymore," said Mike Setzer, head of Metro Transit.

Congestion and transit problems in the Twin Cities affect people in other
areas of the state, too. It can make for a difficult trip from greater
Minnesota to the Mall of America or to a Vikings game, for instance. Some
have even blamed the lack of a strong public transit system, in part, for
Minnesota's failed bid to host the 1996 Olympics and other marquee
events.

Setzer said the strong opposition light rail has faced before construction in
most cities has typically dissolved after it began running. He saw it happen
when he worked for the metro transit system in St. Louis.

"Opponents of rail in St. Louis County (Missouri) were every bit as
vociferous as they are here. Today, you can't find anybody in St. Louis
who's not a rail fan," Setzer said. "Overnight, once the thing started
operating, the critics all turned into fans. Elected officials who had been
opponents became proponents."

Krinkie, R-Shoreview, doesn't yet count himself as a convert. He says light
rail is too pricey, and if a line was to be built, the first one should have
connected Minneapolis and St. Paul. Now that it's nearly finished,
however, Krinkie hopes the train will be well used so the state's
investment isn't squandered.

if another line is built, the Legislature has required that it connect the Twin
Cities' downtowns. Such a route is now in preliminary planning stages. If
everything sailed over the many hurdles it faces -- which isn't likely -- it
would open in 2008 at a cost of $840 million.

Studies are underway for an additional light rail line in southwest
Minneapolis.

And plans for several long-distance commuter rail lines, which could link
St. Cloud and Minneapolis, for example, are in the works. Those would be
fundamentally separate from the Twin Cities light rail system, but would
link up at key points. Commuter rail is different from light rail because it
runs on existing freight train lines, which are leased from private rail
companies.

isaacs, the electrical engineer, keeps a three-inch thick file bursting with
public documents, newspaper clippings yellowed with age and typewriter-
chattered cost estimates he's collected over the years while advocating
light rail.

But now that his decades-long mission is nearing completion, he's leaving
it behind.

"I've done all I could," he says. "I figure it's out of my hands now."




=PTP======================================

NBC Nightly News
Sept. 30 [2003]

Jam nation: Study sees longer commutes

Annual survey finds average driver wasting 51 hours a year


MSNBC STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS


Sept. 30 —  if it seems like more of your time is spent stuck in traffic, you
may be right. In U.S. cities large and small, the daily struggle with bumper-
to-bumper traffic is getting worse, according to a study released Tuesday.
The average rush-hour driver wasted 51 hours sitting in traffic in 2001, the
Texas Transportation institute said in its annual mobility study.


         THE PRICE tag: $69.5 billion in wasted time and gas, said the
study, which looked at 75 urban areas.

       "Congestion extends to more time of the day, more roads, affects
more of the travel and creates more extra travel time than in the past," the
study said.
       Study co-author David Schrank told MSNBC.com that the time stuck
in traffic was based on a 25-minute, one-way commute. Using that
benchmark, the authors calculated that drivers wasted 51 hours a year
waiting instead of moving.
       On a per capita basis, i.e. figuring in non-drivers as well, that average
is 26 hours, four hours more than in 2000, he said. A similar comparison
for driver-only hours is not available as earlier studies didn't look beyond
per capita figures.
       The report found that the average rush-hour driver in Los Angeles
spent about 90 hours waiting in traffic in 2001, far more than anywhere
else.
       The San Francisco-Oakland area was next at 68 hours, followed by
Denver (64), Miami (63) and Chicago and Phoenix, which tied for fifth
(61).


       The study also found that:
 59 percent of major roads are congested compared to 34 percent in
1982, when the survey was first taken.
 The number of hours of the day when congestion might be encountered
has grown from about 4.5 hours to about 7 hours.

         The authors did, however, note that public transportation, traffic
signals on freeway entrance ramps and other congestion-busting
measures have kept a bad situation from getting even worse.
       For example, traffic signal coordination aimed at smoothing the flow
of cars, trucks and buses saved commuters 16 million hours, the report
said.
       The study found some areas of the country where gridlock eased.
The average delay dropped for commuters in San Antonio, Texas;
Fresno, Calif.; and Pensacola, Fla.


       Still, more improvements are needed, the report said. Among the
recommendations: more roads to handle increased demand, additional
bus and car pool lanes, and adjusted work hours for commuters.
       in response to criticism about its earlier studies, the institute, located
at at Texas A&M University, for the first time factored in improvements
that cities are making, such as traffic light coordination and ramp
metering, as well as the benefits of public transportation, study co-author
Tim Lomax said.
       Data from the Federal Highway Administration and information from
various state and local agencies was analyzed by the researchers to
come up with the rankings.
       Report details and other background will be placed on the institute's
Web site at tti.tamu.edu.


by the numbers
Tied-up traffic

The 20 urban areas with heaviest traffic as measured by number of hours
of extra travel time for average rush-hour commuter in 2001:

Urban area Number of hours per year in congestion
Los Angeles 90
San Francisco-Oakland  68
Denver 64
Miami 63
Chicago 61

Urban area Number of hours per year in congestion
Phoenix 61
San Jose, Calif. 60
Boston 58
Washington, D.C. 58
Portland, Ore. 58

Urban area Number of hours per year in congestion
Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood, Fla. 57
Seattle-Everett 56
Atlanta 55
San Bernardino-Riverside, Calif. 55
Houston 55

Urban area Number of hours per year in congestion
Detroit 54
Minneapolis / St.Paul 53
San Diego 51
Las Vegas 51
Dallas-Fort Worth 51
Source: Texas Transportation institute

       The Associated Press contributed to this report.






PTP 2003/10/01-A - CONTENTS

* North Jersey: LRT extensions powered up in test
   Jersey Journal Tuesday, September 30, 2003

* Cincinnati: Regional panels OKs LRT plan
   Cincinnati Post 09-30-2003

* Cincinnati: Traffic up 10X since 1982
   CINCINNATI POST 10-01-200

* Honolulu: Pols eye LRT, may shelve 'BRT'
   Honolulu Star-Bulletin Tuesday, September 30, 2003

* Seattle: Opposition to downtown monorail grows
   SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, October 1, 2003

* Seattle area congestion bad, but transit helps
   King County Journal 2003-10-01

* San Jose: Budget woes may zap LRT network plans
   San Jose Mercury News Mon, Sep. 29, 2003

* San Jose ed: Cut LRT to fund BART
   San Jose Mercury News Monday, September 29, 2003

* Houston's congestion 13th worst in nation
   Houston Chronicle Sept. 30, 2003

* Pittsburgh: Reports of maglev's death 'exaggerated'
   Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Tuesday, September 30, 2003

* Kuala Lumpur: 350,000 ride monorail in 29 days
   The Edge Daily Wednesday, 01-10-2003

* Peirce: Congress's 'puzzling paralysis' on transport law
   Seattle Times Wednesday, October 01, 2003


=PTP=======================================

Jersey Journal
Tuesday, September 30, 2003

Light rail pushes ahead - don't touch the wires

Juice is turned on testing across system


By Jason Fink
Journal staff writer

Workers for NJ Transit yesterday sent the first electrical currents through
the overhead wires that will eventually power the next northward section
of the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Transit System, a portion of the line that
will eventually reach North Bergen.

The above-ground catenary wires that were recently installed trace the
path the system will take across Paterson Plank Road to Hoboken's
Second Street station, on the city's west side, which is nearly complete.

That stop, however, will not be in use until mid-2005, around the time that
the Ninth Street station and stops at Port imperial in Weehawken and
Tonnelle Avenue in North Bergen will also come on line, said Ken
Hitchner, a spokesman for NJ Transit, the light rail's operator.

Meanwhile, the 22nd Street stop in Bayonne, the line's southern terminus,
is expected to open on Nov. 15. Construction on that part of the line
stopped service on the light rail this past weekend.

From Friday night through Sunday, light rail trains did not make stops
south of Liberty State Park in Jersey City.

What began yesterday and will continue is the turning on of the overhead
wires and the electrification of various parts of the line.

The catenary wires carry 750 volts of electricity and people are being
asked to not touch the wires or cross the street-level tracks except at the
designated intersections.

"We're testing the integrity of the wires," Hitchner explained.

First opened in 2000, the light rail now stops at 16 stations from Bayonne
to Hoboken.

Original plans for the system, whose first phase - from Hoboken Terminal
to Bayonne - cost $1.1 billion, called for the tracks to go out to the Vince
Lombardi Park and Ride in Ridgefield.

Since then, there have been proposals to extend the system after it
reaches North Bergen, but no decision has been made.

Jason Fink can be reached at jfink@jjournal.com



=PTP=====================================

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/09/30/oki093003.html

Cincinnati Post
09-30-2003

i-75 project wins 1st approval

By Bob Driehaus
Post staff reporter

A key transportation planning committee has embraced a $1.83 billion
plan to integrate light rail train service with more highway lanes to keep
interstate 75 functional through 2030.

An Ohio-Kentucky-indiana Regional Council of Governments committee
voted 27 to 1, with four abstentions, on Monday afternoon for the plan.

Should the full OKI board agree next month, it would mark the first time
since the failed subway project of the 1920s that passenger rail service
has been included in growth plans for a road in Greater Cincinnati.

Exactly where the highway will be widened to five lanes has not been
determined, except that it will occur between the Ohio River and interstate
675 in Dayton to include at least four lanes in each direction and five
lanes at choke points. Officials will decide on the five-lane sections after
additional engineering and environmental-impact studies.

Most of the highway between the river and I-675 is three lanes, though
large stretches are wider, including the entire segment between the river
and I-74.

No determination has been made on where a light rail system, or its
stations, would be located, although the most frequently mentioned route
is along existing rail lines.

Sterling Uhler, committee chairman, said the vote by the OKI committee
on the study known as the North-South Transportation initiative was a
huge step forward for the region.

"it's not going to happen overnight, but it's one more piece of data that
light-rail has to come sooner or later," Uhler said.

John Schneider, a long-time champion of bringing light rail trains to the
area, thinks the combination of more lanes and light rail service will make
the flow of people and goods along the corridor better by 2030 than it is
today. The vote "means that all these people who looked at this for three
years see light rail as part of the solution. It's not a matter of whether light
rail comes to the region but when," Schneider said.

The committee's recommendation will be forwarded to the full OKI board
for a potential vote on Oct. 9. If the board approves the plan, it will be
inserted into OKI's long-range transportation plan for the region.

Judi Craig, who supervises the I-75 project for OKI, said including the I-75
changes in the long-range OKI plan serves as a guide for future
construction, though it's no guarantee the changes will be funded or clear
the myriad of regulatory and bureaucratic hurdles ahead. But Craig said
no transportation project that seeks state or federal funding can be
approved without being included in OKI's long-range plan.

The best-case scenario would mean the project would be completed
within 15 to 20 years, engineers said.

The committee that approved the plan included representatives from
Cincinnati, Hamilton County, other Greater Cincinnati cities and counties
and other interested parties such as the Sierra Club and light-rail
advocates.

The plan projects that after construction is completed, the road will run at
or under capacity through 2030. That would raised the road's rating on a
federal congestion scale mostly from F to D. F is gridlock on the scale; D
means traffic is flowing at a moderate pace and under capacity.

Diana Martin, Ohio Department of Transportation planning program
administrator, said I-75 congestion would become as bad as the most
congested cities in America if there was no widening or light rail added.
She said that level of congestion would be comparable to that now seen in
Chicago, Washington and Boston.

Cindy Minter, a consultant with Cincinnati-based Parsons Brinckerhoff, an
engineering consultant, said Monday's vote merely starts the process.

"This is the first step of the planning process. This is the very beginning,"
she said.

if the OKI board agrees with the recommended plan, future steps include
more detailed engineering studies and environmental-impact studies.

Martin said the first segments of the plan would probably be
improvements to several current choke points, including the interchanges
with Cincinnati's Hopple Street, Mitchell Avenue and interstate 74, and the
Lockland interchange.

OKI has approved modifying the four interchanges, but no details of the
improvements have been determined. ODOT is seeking funds to
determine the best way to help traffic flow better on the highway as well
as entering and exiting the highway.

Martin said how large each subsequent widening segment is depends on
a variety of factors. Engineers will focus on efficiency as well as keeping
traffic flowing as smoothly as possible. She said segments will be widened
simultaneous to scheduled repaving of aging pavement.

Money for the new lanes would come from federal funds channeled
through ODOT. The money would be allocated piecemeal over many
years.

ODOT has already requested millions of dollars to widen the highway in
Warren and Butler counties. Martin said the request was consistent with
long-range plans that are already in place within OKI. Other funds will be
requested in the coming years.

Obtaining funding for light rail will be trickier. Federal guidelines require
that 20 percent of a light-rail project be locally funded -- through any
combination of city, county and state funds.

No local funding source has been identified. The only attempt at raising
money for light rail failed resoundingly in November 2002 when Hamilton
County voters rejected a half-cent sales tax increase by a 2-to-1 ratio.

Proponents of light rail including Schneider and Glen Brand of the Sierra
Club point out that communities throughout the country typically reject
light-rail tax levies on the first try before warming to the concept.

The sole dissenting vote Monday came from Hamilton County
Commissioner John Dowlin, a longtime light rail critic. He cited three
problems he has with the recommendation:

•  The cost estimate: the $1.83 billion price tag is in 2003 dollars and will
inflate to a much larger price over the years. "I think it's a joke to believe
those dollars will be appropriate for a project that will be completed in
2030," he said.

•  Lack of post-construction studies: Dowlin said HLB, the consultant that
conducted traffic studies for the project, failed to show the changes would
work in the real world by not following up with post-construction studies in
other cities.

•  No short-term fixes: He sees a continuing threat that Hamilton County
will lose businesses to less-populous counties in the metropolitan area if
current congestion problems aren't alleviated sooner than the 15- to 20-
year timeframe presented for this plan.

"What do we do in the short term? We've been losing people and losing
businesses to other counties," he said.

Dowlin suggested OKI study short-term alternatives, including a "hot lane"
in which motorists pay to drive. He said Toledo has introduced such lanes.
No action was taken on his suggestion.

Few others have organized in opposition to light rail. Among those who
have, Stephan Louis, who heads an organization called Alternatives to
Light Rail Transit, questioned the assumed speed of light rail trains used
in the study. He called unsuccessfully for a reassessment of the economic
projections.

The four abstentions on the vote came from Cincinnati's two
representatives; the Sierra Club's Brand and Haynes Goddard, a
University of Cincinnati professor of engineering.

Cincinnati City Council Member John Cranley expressed apprehension at
the plan's lack of specifics on where the highway would be widened to
four lanes in each direction.

He said Cincinnati's segment is already four lanes in each direction, and
he was concerned that if the highway is widened north of the city, the
extra traffic that segment would carry would cause more congestion on
the interstate in the city.

Engineers said such a scenario was unlikely since engineering studies
would be designed to identify and prevent any potential choke points.

Brand was unhappy the plan didn't include information on how many more
vehicles the new configuration would add, the effect on air pollution and
the impact on neighborhoods.

"Today was a mixed bag. The good news is that OKI, representing the
municipalities throughout Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky,
recognized and acknowledged that attempting to pave our way out of
congestion is a bankrupt idea. Instead, they widely acknowledged that
light rail service is going to be a necessary development.

Brand wants future studies to integrate large-scale community planning --
zoning and such -- with transportation planning.

The OKI committee also approved a motion to launch a study of rail
service along the corridor to find ways to integrate passenger rail service
with commercial train service.

The study will seek better freight connections with trucks, possible truck
restrictions and additional freight rail as a prelude to adding passenger
rail.

OKI is still investigating the merits of a rush-hour truck ban on I-75
through Greater Cincinnati. But engineers stressed that the overall impact
on the region's transportation network, as well as the cost to trucking
companies, should be considered.

ODOT is conducting a study of truck bans across the U.S. The study is
expected to be complete within two months.



=PTP===========================================

http://www.cincypost.com/2003/10/01/cong100103.html

CINCINNATI POST
10-01-200

Traffic up tenfold since '82

By Bob Driehaus
Post staff reporter

Traffic congestion has grown far more rapidly than the population in
Greater Cincinnati during the past two decades.

Commuters now spend 10 times as long sitting in traffic as they did 20
years ago, and the cost of all that wasted gasoline and lost productivity
has grown to $525 million a year, according to a new study released
Tuesday
by the Texas Transportation institute, an affiliate of Texas A&M University.
Population for the metropolitan area grew by just 21 percent from
1980-2000, from 1.62 million people to 1.96 million, while traffic
increased tenfold from 1982-2001.

Ranked 27th

in 1982, according to the study, local commuters spent two hours sitting in
traffic, while in 2001 that figure had grown to 20 hours.
The solution locally and for every other congested U.S. city, researchers
concluded, is finding the right mix of traffic management alternatives
among five categories:

* Mass transit, such as buses or light rail.
* Bus and carpool lanes.
* Traffic signal coordination.
* Efficient clearing of crashed and disabled vehicles from freeways.
* Use of freeway entrance ramp signals to control traffic flow.

"This year's study reinforces our belief that the best solution is actually
a combination of solutions. Each city needs its own bag of tricks to
address this growing problem," said Tim Lomax, one of the study's
researchers.
Traffic is worsening throughout the country, according to the Texas report.
T/he average rush-hour driver wasted more than two full days -- about 51
hours -- sitting in traffic in 2001. That's an increase of four hours in
the last five years.

The total price tag: $69.5 billion in wasted time and gas, the study said.
Researchers said congestion nationally would be far worse without
existing
public transportation and traffic management strategies like high-speed
lanes.
"The annual effect of eliminating public transportation service in all 75
cities, while hopefully not a realistic alternative, would have the effect
of adding the equivalent of 1 billion hours of annual travel time," the
study said.

The study was released one day after an Ohio-Kentucky-indiana Regional
Council of Governments committee voted overwhelmingly to recommend
a mix of
more lanes and the addition of light rail to keeping traffic moving on I-75
through 2030. The OKI panel said a combination of light-rail train service,
to run parallel to interstate 75 between the Ohio River and I-675 in
Dayton, and widening of the highway to four and five lanes offered the
best
hope for the heavily traveled highway.

The plan for I-75 is estimated to cost $1.83 billion, not taking into
account inflation, and would take 15 to 20 years to complete.
It faces myriad hurdles, including a vote by the full OKI board, public
hearings and financing challenges before it can become reality.
Allen Freeman, OKI spokesman, said Tuesday Greater Cincinnati must
turn to
a variety of solutions to solve its growing congestion problem.
"We do need to focus on the issue of public transportation to make sure
commuters have options. If we had a good mix of transit and commuter
options, then we'd be in great shape," he said.
"I think we have to look at all of the options. A number of our major
arteries are going to require additional lanes, but I think we need to look
at all of the options, and not preclude any option to try to improve our
system.''

Freeman cited continuing efforts to improve the system, including
upgrading
the ARTIMIS system that uses a series of cameras and electronic
message
signs to keep motorists apprised of accidents, traffic jams and other
problems.

Glen Brand, the Sierra Club's Midwest representative, touted the Texas
study as further proof of the need for Greater Cincinnati to embrace light
rail service and institute land-use planning that coordinates new
development with access to bus lines and existing infrastructure.
David Braun, who will become general manager of the Transit Authority of
Northern Kentucky on Oct. 20, returns to Greater Cincinnati after a stint
in Peoria, ill., as general manager of that area's transit authority.
He agreed that a combination of solutions is necessary to reduce traffic
congestion. "Reducing congestion requires more than just building roads.
It's the combination of mass transit, better land use planning, trying to
build facilities and homes accessible to mass transit, and convenient bike
and pedestrian paths," he said.

His impression of Greater Cincinnati's traffic?

"it's not as awful as many of the larger cities are, but certainly I think
it has the potential of becoming awful," Braun said.




=PTP=======================================

http://starbulletin.com/2003/09/30/news/index.html

Honolulu Star-Bulletin
Tuesday, September 30, 2003

City Council revisits rail transit

State and city officials hope
to come up with an agreeable
plan to examine feasibility

By Crystal Kua
ckua@starbulletin.com


The City Council may move ahead with rail transit, an issue it derailed
more than 10 years ago.


"I'm hoping to get the Council to show preference for a light rail or a fixed
rail, probably an elevated fixed-rail system, because I think that would
move toward a consensus between the city and the state," Council
Chairman Gary Okino said.

Okino has drafted a resolution that calls on the city administration to come
up with a plan to put a fixed-rail system into effect. Rail systems can vary
from light projects with rails or trolley lines to heavy ones with concrete
structures dedicated to transit cars.

Okino, a member of a task force convened by Gov. Linda Lingle to
explore solutions to traffic gridlock on Oahu, said the resolution would put
the state and city closer to agreement on one plan.

"The state administration (seems) very receptive to a fixed-rail system,"
Okino said. "I think it's moving decidedly in the direction of a fixed-rail
system. The only thing missing is the Council taking a position on it."

"Maybe (we can) recommend how we're going to pay for this, finance the
system, what needs to be done. So in that way, Council members can
support a fixed-rail system without locking us into this thing until we look at
some of the feasibility issues," Okino said.

Okino said a hearing could be held in October and the Council could take
a vote at its November meeting.

in 1992, a fixed-rail plan was killed after the City Council voted 5-4 against
a tax increase to pay for the city's share of the cost. As a result, millions of
dollars in federal funding were lost.

State and city officials -- the governor, mayor, Legislature and City Council
-- are hoping to come up with one plan they can agree on to avoid that
kind of roadblock again.

Mayor Jeremy Harris, also a member of the task force, said he doesn't
think the group has decided on a route yet. "My reading is that the task
force and the governor haven't zeroed in on any particular transportation
solution."

Harris said his recommendation -- if the group does agree on a fixed-rail
system -- is that such a project would not go through the federal funding
process initially.

"If there's one thing we've learned in the last 35 years is the process to be
eligible for federal funds is so long and expensive and it adds so much to
the cost of the project, you're better off just deciding that you'd like to pay
for it locally," Harris said.

instead, the mayor said, a source of local funding -- like an excise or sales
tax -- should be dedicated to the project.

Harris said he couldn't comment specifically on the resolution until he
sees it. He said if the Council votes in favor of the measure, it doesn't
necessarily mean the end of the regional portion of his controversial Bus
Rapid Transit plan.

"Regional BRT is one basically cheap, quick alternative that could be put
in place while a rail system is being funded and designed," Harris said.

Okino said the in-town BRT or an enhanced bus system could also act as
a feeder system from the fixed-rail system, but without the exclusive
lanes.

But Budget Chairwoman Ann Kobayashi said she won't vote for any
further funding for BRT.

"I think whatever transportation system is done for part of the island, we
should look at a continuation to Waikiki or something compatible,"
Kobayashi said. "Whatever the task force suggests, we will certainly take
a good look at it."



=PTP=========================================

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/142038_monorail01.html

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
Wednesday, October 1, 2003

No monorail through downtown, some urge

By KERY MURAKAMi
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

Reflecting uneasiness about the monorail project's finances, several
business leaders are planning to run a campaign to keep the line from
running through downtown Seattle.

The group led by downtown real estate developer Greg Smith wants to
press the Seattle Monorail Project to explore chopping the planned 14-
mile line into two pieces: one running from West Seattle to the south end
of Metro's bus tunnel, the other from Ballard to the north end of the tunnel.

More frequent Metro bus service through the tunnel would be an
"elevator" between the two lines, said Smith, who among other things is
planning a condo complex at Second Avenue and Pike Street and is part
of a team of developers hoping to redevelop the north parking lot at
Seahawks Stadium.

Monorail spokesman Paul Bergman said the idea doesn't make sense.

"No line anywhere builds a line from the neighborhoods that stops at the
edge of downtown," Bergman said. "We plan to do what the voters asked
us to do, build an entire 14-mile line from West Seattle through downtown
to Ballard."

Driving the business leaders' idea are downtown's old fears that the
monorail would disrupt the area and new ones stemming from the
revelations the Seattle Monorail Project is collecting about 30 percent less
than anticipated from the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax that Seattle voters
approved in November.

Despite assurances from the project that it will build the entire line or
nothing, several business and neighborhood leaders are worried the
money will run out and the project won't be entirely completed.

Smith said not building the line through downtown would both spare the
neighborhood from monorail construction and save the project money.

"With the revenue shortfall and the potential for cost overruns, we need to
be looking at ways to get the most for the dollars so that the monorail can
be successful," Smith said.

Bergman, the monorail spokesman, said building two unconnected lines
would mean having to build two separate maintenance facilities. Also
unknown is what happens to Sound Transit, which already has an
agreement with Metro to use the tunnel for its light rail line.

Smith acknowledged after the group's first meeting yesterday that it hasn't
answered the questions. He said the group plans to begin raising money
to run an ad campaign to raise public support for the idea. It could lobby
the monorail authority to change its plan, or press the City Council to hold
up the project while alternatives like the tunnel idea are fleshed out.

Ultimately, Smith said the group may gather signatures to put an initiative
before voters next spring to repeal the plan and approve a new one
building the two lines from West Seattle and Ballard to the edges of
downtown.

Smith said the group will invite others from outside downtown to propose
the tunnel and other "creative" ideas to help the monorail deal with
probable budget cuts. In addition to Smith, the group includes Howard
Anderson, a downtown developer who opposed last year's monorail
initiative, commercial realtor Art Wahl and developer Aaron Alhadeff.

The Downtown Seattle Association, representing the businesses and
residents, has decided to wait for more cost and finance estimates from
the monorail authority before taking a stance, said Stephen Koehler, co-
chairman of the association's monorail committee.

But Koehler, who runs Westlake Center, said the bus tunnel idea "seems
like a win, win."

Washington Mutual, which is concerned about the project's effect on its
joint development with the Seattle Art Museum, stopped short of
endorsing Smith's group. But the bank is encouraging the monorail project
to "explore the viability" of the bus tunnel idea, said Washington Mutual
spokeswoman Libby Hutchinson.

The tunnel idea first arose in a Seattle Times opinion piece March 13
written by former Mayor Paul Schell, Flexcar director Neil Peterson and
former Seattle Weekly publisher David Brewster. In an interview, Schell
said the region has only limited amounts of money for transportation.
Sharing the tunnel made more sense than building two new systems
through downtown.


P-I reporter Kery Murakami can be reached at 206-448-8131 or
kerymurakami@seattlepi.com



=PTP=========================================

http://www.kingcountyjournal.com/sited/story/html/144943

King County Journal
2003-10-01

Puget Sound congestion improves to 12th worst in nation -

Region ranked fifth in last year's report

by Jeff Switzer
Journal Reporter

Puget Sound drivers spent an average of 32 hours staring into brake
lights while stuck in the 12th worst traffic in the country, according to a
national analysis of 2001 congestion released Tuesday.

The ranking would have been ninth worst in the country if not for money
spent on buses, HOV lanes, ramp meters and helpful tow trucks,
according to the Texas Transportation institute.

Bus service alone placed the Seattle area fifth in the country for reducing
the hours of gridlock, behind New York, San Francisco, Boston and
Washington D.C.

Acknowledging factors other than new pavement won praise from the
state Department of Transportation and transit advocates at the
Transportation Choices Coalition -- groups critical of past congestion
reports.

''We see it as very promising that they have moved in that direction,'' said
Charlie Howard, strategic planning and programming director for the state
Department of Transportation. ''Across the country, delay is still
increasing; congestion is getting worse. We're still congested.

''Roadways are definitely part of the solution, but TTI makes it very clear
that you can't do it all with roadways.''

Puget Sound's ranking improved over last year's fifth-place showing,
which reflected 31 hours sitting in traffic in 2000. The area was third worst
in the country the year before.

The annual report is the only one of its kind in the country and compared
the 2001 traffic levels in 75 urban areas, including the Seattle-Everett
area.

Current road-building would have to double to keep pace with congestion
and make up for years of fewer new roads, an almost impossible feat,
according to the report.

Peter Hurley and other transit advocates at the Transportation Choices
Coalition have been saying that for years.

''investing in smart roads, HOV lanes and other operations saves
significant time and money,'' Hurley said. ''We've been critical that the
report was myopic,'' focusing too heavily on factors other than how many
hours drivers are delayed by gridlock, Hurley said. ''They've done a good
job coming up with a balanced report.''

Puget Sound drivers spend fewer hours in traffic thanks to buses, the
report said, at a value of $277 per person.

''HOV lanes really do help relieve congestion for people using them and
other drivers,'' Howard said.

To solve congestion without new roads, 3 percent to 4 percent of all new
cars would have to be car pools or transit ridership would have to increase
by more than one-third each year, according to the report.

Therefore, state officials said, a combination of new roads, HOV lanes,
bus service and other ways of operating the highways is the most effective
way to control the spiraling increase in traffic congestion.

An area's ranking depends on how the math is sliced. The report studied
hours saved as a region and individually, and dollars saved as a region
and individually.

in 2001, Puget Sound drivers spent an estimated 65 million hours stuck in
gridlock -- 17th worst in the country. Congestion wasted $1.3 billion each
year here-- about $635 per driver -- again 17th worst in the country. That
includes $175 million in gas wasted while idling in traffic, or 53 gallons per
driver (15th worst), according to the report.

The city with the granddaddy of all congestion remains Los Angeles,
which earned the No. 1 spot in every category. Each driver there faced 52
hours stuck in congestion in 2001 -- an improvement over 55 hours in
2000.

The report is largely an exercise in computer modeling, Howard said.
''We would rather have a direct measurement of congestion. Models can
only be so accurate.''

Anything slower than 60 mph on the freeway was labeled ''delay,''
according to the report. Puget Sound area drivers and other cities with
between one and three million people should expect to sit in 20 hours of
congestion a year, according to the report.

Relatively speaking, though, Howard said it makes sense that Los
Angeles is No. 1 worse for evening commutes, followed by San Francisco
and Chicago, with Denver, Boston and Washington D.C. tied for fourth.

Since 1982, congestion has added 26 hours a year to Puget Sound
commutes.

if trends aren't reversed, Seattle area congestion will be as bad as that of
the very large cities such as Los Angeles or Boston or Washington D.C.
within a decade, according to the report. Similarly, cities smaller than
Seattle might see traffic as bad as Seattle within a decade.

Since 2001, though, the Puget Sound economy has tumbled, taking traffic
levels with it. That will change, Howard said.

''As soon as the economy begins to pick up,'' he said, ''we're right back in
the situation we were in.''

Jeff Switzer can be reached at jeff.switzer@kingcountyjournal.com or 425-
453-4234.<


=PTP===========================================

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/6887842.htm

San Jose Mercury News
Mon, Sep. 29, 2003

Light rail network plans fading

SOUTH BAY EXPANSION MAY BE ECONOMIC CASUALTY

By Gary Richards
Mercury News


[PHOTO]
(NHAT V. MEYER / MERCURY NEWS)
VTA's light rail train prepares to leave the Paseo De San Antonio station
on Second Street in downtown San Jose.


Over the past decade, when the economy was booming and taxpayers
were willing, planners envisioned a mass transit system that covered the
South Bay like a web.

Trolleys would dip into Cupertino, Los Gatos and Palo Alto and run the
length of Stevens Creek Boulevard. They would pass each other in the
medians along Capitol Expressway and Highway 85, and perhaps go into
Coyote Valley. And BART would tunnel beneath downtown San Jose on
its way from Fremont to Santa Clara.

Today, the Valley Transportation Authority is facing an enormous financial
crisis that could build into a $1.1 billion debt within two decades for
operational costs. And because BART's popularity makes it all but
untouchable, the VTA is moving toward declaring light rail the first major
casualty.

Although no decisions have been made, internal documents and
interviews with board members indicate that the VTA will probably scrap
plans to construct a series of new trolley lines endorsed by voters in a
series of ballot measures. Construction will continue on extensions to
Campbell and deep into East San Jose, but other lines almost certainly
will be shelved.

''We have $1 billion allocated for five different light-rail projects,'' General
Manager Pete Cipolla told the special committee looking into VTA's
finances earlier this month. ''We need to revisit that.''

Light rail extends for nearly 30 miles, from South San Jose to Milpitas and
Mountain View. Next year the extension into East San Jose opens to
Alum Rock Avenue, and could go as far south as the Eastridge mall by
2009. Trains on the line to Campbell are scheduled to run by 2006.

That's nearly 50 miles of track. A lot, but not the 75- to 100-mile network
once envisioned. Some say that may be a good thing.

Earlier this year, the Reason Foundation, a Los Angeles-based
transportation think tank, concluded that Santa Clara County's light rail
system was the least productive in the nation and has operating costs that
are more than twice the national average.

''San Jose isn't a dense place, and light rail doesn't work because the
jobs and entertainment venues are so spread out,'' said Adrian Moore, the
study's project director. ''The initial mistake was choosing a form of mass
transit that doesn't work for the city. It makes even less sense to
compound the mistake by continuing to pour more money into a system
that drains huge amounts of money and will never be a main source of
transportation for anything more than a tiny, select group.''

Blow to cities

But an end to light rail expansion would affect cities that have mapped out
housing and business developments based on the availability of mass
transit. ''We've been peddling smart growth strategies all over the
county,'' said David Cortese, a San Jose councilman and VTA board
member. ''Now they are making land-use decisions for the next 30 years,
only for many light rail won't be a part of it.''

Trains are being considered along Santa Clara Street, but may give way
to improved bus service. Otherwise lines at risk are in the earliest stages -
- while they have been described in broad terms in a pair of ballot
measures, no specific routes have been determined, and no dollars spent.
But for years, planners have talked of bringing light rail into the county's
fastest growing areas, such as the Coyote Valley either along Santa
Teresa Boulevard or Monterey Highway.

There also have been discussions about a link to the Peninsula, tracks
along developments planned along Capitol Expressway toward Highway
87, and trains that could bring shoppers to Santana Row and Valley Fair.

Now those plans no longer look viable, for a host of reasons.

One is the lack of cash to operate new lines. Projected sales tax revenues
have plummeted by $60 million a year, and sales taxes make up 80
percent of the district's operating budget. The VTA has made major cuts
in service, but even so it had to go to court last week to get enough cash
to maintain existing transit lines.

A second reason is light rail's declining popularity: Ridership has fallen
from more than 30,000 a day three years ago to 20,000 riders now -- in
part because of the economy, and in part because trains run less
frequently.

The most critical problem is that there is very little money to build new light
rail. The Measure A tax passed three years ago was first expected to
bring in $6 billion, with perhaps $1 billion of that available to build new
lines. Now as the recession lingers, the forecast is down to $4 billion, and
most of that will be needed for BART. And now a San Jose judge has
allowed the VTA to dip into Measure A funds for operating costs, which
could also deplete that pool of money.

Perhaps the strongest indication that decision-makers are daunted by the
obstacles is this: The VTA has recently mapped out several ''funding
scenarios'' that would take it through the next two decades.

Some rely on existing resources, while others assume that voters will
approve a sales tax increase for transportation in 2004. But only the new-
tax scenarios include money to operate any new light rail, in the form of
an single extension of the Capitol line from Alum Rock Avenue to
Eastridge Shopping Center.

Plans endangered

it's improbable that any money would be spent to plan, let alone build, any
other line.

''Why spend money to study projects you can't build? I absolutely see the
rationale for this,'' said Dianne McKenna, a member of the California
Transportation Commission and former supervisor.

The VTA's Cipolla is convinced that when the economy cranks back up
the light rail lines now under construction will boost ridership significantly.
One day, he hopes, it will make sense to expand.

''Give me 200,000 more jobs back,'' he said, referring to the number lost
in Silicon Valley since the recession, ''and you'll see plenty of riders.''

But it may be a decade before those jobs and riders return, and as the
trolley dream fades, transit advocates are starting to look beyond it.

''The VTA may need to refocus on bus service, and that may be a good
thing,'' said McKenna, ''because we can get it cheaper and faster.''

Added Cortese: ''in the long term, I think light rail still needs to be the
plan. But now we have to define long term. Will light rail be delayed for
decades? Absolutely.''

For now, this is what VTA decision makers are thinking: Finish the East
San Jose and Campbell light rail extensions. Perhaps run more buses
down Santa Clara Street instead of the trolley.

Continue preliminary engineering studies for BART and light rail to
Eastridge. Try for a new tax increase. Avoid canceling bus routes. Scrub
most everything else.

if a new tax passes, the agency projects healthy revenues within a few
years. If it fails, light rail may not be the only casualty. Even building BART
would be a struggle.

The $4.1 billion extension plan relies on $1.5 billion in federal and state
aid that is questionable. And new tax money will be needed to help cover
daily operational costs.

''That,'' said Scott Buhrer, the VTA chief financial officer, ''is when you
get to the fork in the road.''


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact Gary Richards at mrroadshow@mercurynews. com or (408) 920-
5335.



=PTP=========================================

[BATN]

San Jose Mercury News
Monday, September 29, 2003

VTA should cut LRT plans to save BART

Editorial

VTA faces reality: Everything can't be built


Buses are a lifeline and should be ahead of light rail


Finally, the blinders are off: the Valley Transportation Authority is facing
the fact that there's
not enough money to build everything voters were promised when they
agreed to pay for a number of
transportation improvements, mostly bringing BART from Fremont to San
Jose.


To nobody's surprise, new light rail lines appear to be on the chopping
block. As they should. A
larger light rail network might lead to heavier use of existing lines, but the
cost of that gamble
cannot be justified now -- not with VTA facing what could grow into a $1.1
billion deficit within
two decades.


At a Mercury News symposium last June, VTA board and staff members
refused to speculate about cuts
in the 2000 Measure A spending plan. It was too early to speculate, they
said -- plus they needed to
get public comment before setting priorities.


Somewhere over the summer, reality set in and plans are taking shape,
as Gary Richards reports in a
Page One story today. [BATN:
]


Light rail lines under construction to Campbell and to the Eastridge Mall
will be completed, but
proposed lines to places like the Coyote Valley and Valley Fair most likely
will be scrapped.


it would have been helpful if VTA representatives had been more
forthcoming at the symposium. And
what happened to public comment?


Officially, they'll have to wait until early next year. The VTA board will
decide in November what
options to propose for public review, and hearings will be scheduled
starting in January on an
updated transportation plan. Of course, people can always comment at
regular VTA board meetings. The
schedule is on their web site, .


But this is a no-brainer. Buses are a lifeline for people who can't drive; it
would be irresponsible
to endanger that system to run more mostly empty light rail cars. And
BART was clearly what voters
had in mind when more than 70 percent of them approved Measure A.


Dropping light rail additions may be just the start. A new tax measure will
be needed to operate
BART here, and even before that, construction money could run short.


But at least VTA is acknowledging the obvious: We can't build it all.


-----
[BATN: This has been known since well before this tax was presented to
Santa Clara County Voters.
Where can the Mercury editorial board have been hiding for the the last
thirty years of BART cost
overruns? See
]




=PTP=======================================

Houston Chronicle
Sept. 30, 2003

Drivers spend 55 hours extra in traffic in 2001

Study ranks Houston 13th worst in nation

By RAD SALLEE

A Houstonian with a 25-minute commute spent 55 hours extra in 2001 -- a
full work week plus two days -- creeping along in traffic instead of sleeping
late, earning money or reading the newspaper, according to an annual
study by Texas A&M University.

Those whose commutes took longer than 25 minutes, the national
average, wasted even more time locked in their wheeled cubicles.

There is some good news in these all-too-familiar statistics. The amount
of time needed for a typical commute increased just 1 percent from 2000 -
- a blip compared to increases in other major cities such as Denver, which
recorded a 3.5 percent jump.

The Texas Transportation institute released its study Tuesday in the
House Office Building in Washington. Not entirely by coincidence, this
was the day the federal transportation funding bill, known as TEA-21,
expires; lawmakers often cite the study to make their case for more road
and transit money.

"More is the answer," engineer Tim Lomax, co-author of the 2003 Urban
Mobility Report, said in the Washington news conference. "More roads,
more transit, more operations, more demand management, more options
for land use -- and more good ideas."

Overall, the study found, Houston was still a better place to motor than
some other cities. The worst jams were in Los Angeles, where the
average annual travel delay was 90 hours for a 25-minute commute.
Houston tied for 13th nationally with Atlanta and San Bernardino-
Riverside.

This year's report, based on the most current available statistics, had
some new wrinkles. In response to criticism that past reports put too much
emphasis on the benefits of road-building, the current study estimates the
impact of an array of efforts to relieve congestion -- mass transit, high
occupancy vehicle lanes, computerized signals, ramp metering, and faster
clearing of wrecks and stalls.

in Houston, it found, transit saved the average person 5.7 hours of
potential delay per year. Total annual delays in the area would have been
about 15 percent higher if transit did not exist, and about 2 percent higher
without HOV lanes.

"There's a lot to digest here," said David Crossley, president of the Gulf
Coast institute and an advocate of anti-sprawl development policies that
emphasize walkable neighborhoods, mass transit and housing density.

"The most important addition (to the report) this year is the information
about transit and the value it has in cities," Crossley said. "What we're
seeing is that the one-size-fits-all approach of only adding highway
capacity is a thing of the past. This is something really new."

Viewed another way, however, mass transit and other measures reduced
travel time for any particular commute here only by about 5 percent,
Lomax said. But some of these improvements -- ramp metering and
computerized signals, for example -- are in their infancy and should yield
more benefits in future years, he said.

"These are things you do because they are cost-effective and because
they are relatively easy and relatively cheap," he said.

in a summary of the report's findings, Lomax writes, "Congestion is
worsening, no doubt about that, but it would be a much greater problem if
not for these and other remedies.

"This year's study reinforces our belief that the best solution is actually a
combination of solutions. Each city needs its own 'bag of tricks' to address
this growing problem."

Not that such relief measures are a substitute for more road capacity, the
study indicates. "Changes in roadway supply have an effect on change in
delay," it says. "It is clear that adding roadway at about the same rate as
travel (demand) grows will slow the growth of congestion."

But the report also said, "It would be almost impossible to attempt to
maintain a constant congestion level with road construction only."

At least twice the current level of road expansion would be needed, it said.

"An even larger problem would be to find suitable roads that can be
widened or areas where roads can be added year after year," it said.

The institute's report always lags two years behind its data, which are
based on traffic counts by state transportation departments. The raw
numbers are sent to the U.S. Department of Transportation, which
organizes them and returns them to the states, said the report's co-author
David Shrank.

Compared with last year's report, based on data from 2000, Houston's
congestion changed slightly. The so-called "travel time index," a ratio of
the time an actual commute takes during peak hours compared to free-
flow conditions, rose from 1.38 to 1.39. In other words, it takes about 40
percent longer during rush hour.

in the 2002 report, Houston ranked fifth-worst among U.S. urban areas
with an average annual delay of 75 hours, but Schrank and Lomax said
that figure cannot be compared to this year's because the 2002 measure
took into account the length of commute.

if delays had been based on a 25-minute commute in the 2002 report, as
they were for this year's, average delay per commuter would have been
about 54 hours and Houston's rank would changed little if at all, Lomax
said.

This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2130030



=PTP========================================

http://www.postgazette.com/pg/03273/227102.stm

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Tuesday, September 30, 2003

Editorial: Mind the maglev

Roddey should have stayed an optimist for now

Maglev may be a mirage, a glittering oasis of jobs and opportunity in a
Western Pennsylvania landscape that often seems bleak. But the only
way anyone will know if the $3 billion high-speed train project is a chimera
is to keep marching forward until the image either dissolves or takes on
the look of substance.

in truth, it's too early to say, but that hasn't prevented county Chief
Executive Jim Roddey from declaring maglev as good as dead. No
journeying a little closer for him. His advice last week to the Pittsburgh
chapter of the international Association of Business Communicators:
"Forget about maglev." The federal government, he said, isn't going to pay
for it.

Mr. Roddey may simply be the realist here. The federal deficit is swelling
daily, and it is hard to see Washington coming up with $950 million for a
futuristic magnetic levitation train that would link Greensburg, Pittsburgh
and Pittsburgh international Airport. The Federal Railroad Administration
has indefinitely postponed the selection of the project -- there are at least
two other competitors -- and Congress has not authorized any
expenditure.

But so far Sen. Arlen Specter, an influential member of a U.S. Senate
Appropriations subcommittee, hasn't declared an end to his support for
the project. And Maglev Inc., the Monroeville-based company that is part
of a partnership promoting the project, is not yet ready to abandon the
idea. A spokesman last week called for patience.

To paraphrase Mark Twain, reports of maglev's death are somewhat
exaggerated. It is dismaying to see Mr. Roddey, who has been a
supporter of the project, read the last rites now. Instead of playing the
realist, it would have been better if he had been an optimist for a while
longer.

Maglev's revival may be a desperate hope, but if it ever comes to fruition,
this area stands to gain a great deal. Not only would a speedy and novel
transportation link become part of the infrastructure, with the eyes of the
nation and world upon it, but also Western Pennsylvania would be
uniquely placed to become the engineering center for a 21st-century
technology.

Doubts about federal financing in an era of budget deficits are real
enough, but imagination and logic nevertheless suggest that maglev -- or
something like it -- will have an important place in the future. To doubt that
is to think that transportation will essentially stand still, that conventional
trains and crowded highways will be the way people move forever.

Pittsburgh and its leaders need to believe in a brighter future for maglev
until the moment when the present confirms that all hope is dead.


=PTP===========================================

http://www.theedgedaily.com/article.cfm?id=25279,


The Edge Daily
Wednesday, 01-10-2003

30-09-2003: KL Monorail charges normal fare from Oct 1

By: By Ng Kar Yean

KL Monorail will start charging normal fares and operate longer hours as
of Oct 1.

in a statement on Sept 30, KL Monorail System Sdn Bhd said normal
fares for the 8.6km monorail system were priced at RM1.20, RM1.60,
RM2.10 and RM2.50.

Daily operation would start at 7am and close at 8pm, it said. The company
expects the operation hours to extend to midnight by year-end.

it said over 350,000 people rode on KL monorail during its introductory
five-hour daily service in September. The service runs from KL Sentral in
Brickfields to Jalan Tun Razak, traversing Kuala Lumpur's central
business district.



=PTP===========================================

Seattle Times
Wednesday, October 01, 2003

Congress' puzzling paralysis on nation's transportation

Neal Peirce

Congress just struck out on the biggest jobs/environment/infrastructure bill
before it — TEA-21, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century.

instead of a full five-year reauthorization, committing $375 billion to build
and repair critical highway, bridge and public transit facilities, the
lawmakers came up with a lame five-month extension of the expiring 1998
statute. Next spring, in the heat of a contentious presidential election year,
they're unlikely to do much better.

With 3 million jobs lost since winter 2001, the congressional paralysis
seems puzzling. Why not create 90,000 new jobs short-term, 1.3 million
long-term, putting people to work building and repairing infrastructure that
undergirds a strong economy?

One reason is obvious: the Bush administration is viscerally opposed to
an increase in the gas tax — up to 5 cents a gallon — that virtually every
transportation expert says is necessary for an adequate national program.
So could Congress develop a veto-proof majority for a new and
appropriately funded TEA-21? Maybe, but here's where the plot thickens.

TEA-21 and its predecessor, the 1991 intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act, only made it through Congress because a new coalition of
environmentalists and urban advocates, organized as the Surface
Transportation Planning Project (STPP), coalesced to break asphalt-
happy state highway departments' historic hammerlock on all
transportation spending.

Metropolitan planning organizations, in touch with business and citizens,
were given power to switch substantial highway monies to public transit.
Funds were set aside for enhancements such as greenways and
bikeways. Bottom line: community welfare, not just the interests of autos,
would be served.

But this summer, the highway lobby tried an end-run, getting the House
Appropriations Committee to strip enhancements from fiscal year 2004
appropriations ("times are tough, we don't have money for bike trails and
scenic byways," went the argument). The move succeeded in committee,
where the highway lobby's political contributions were targeted. But on the
House floor, a motion to restore enhancement funds got a thumping 327-
90 majority, including every Democrat and a majority of Republicans.

"It was the easiest environmental vote of the session," says Rep. Earl
Blumenauer, D-Ore., claiming an immense coalition now favors balanced
transportation law. It ranges, he says, from public transit and "smart
growth" groups to land trusts and Scenic America, cyclists and trail
enthusiasts, chambers of commerce, Main Street groups, city and county
organizations, historic preservationists and significant chunks of organized
labor.

if the highway lobby used its noggin and made a deal with this coalition,
it's possible a renewed TEA-21, including a 5-cent gas tax hike, could
pass — even over a Bush veto. But to make peace with the
environmentalists, says David Burwell, former STPP president, the
highway lobby has to recognize "the time's long past when it can hold the
public treasury hostage by pointing to increased congestion and
demanding more money to 'build our way out.' "

One is reminded of how big transportation-funding initiatives, heavily
focused on roads and shortchanging transit, went down in flames last
November in Northern Virginia and Washington state. Endorsed by road
builders and local business coalitions, the measures were too pro-sprawl
to avoid environmentalists' opposition.

There's a new national politics at work. It's not anti-highway — we're an
auto-oriented land, and people recognize that repairing the roads and
bridges we have, plus selected expansions, makes sense and does cost
money.

But they want some proof that congestion will actually be relieved. They
oppose spending just to increase sprawl. They support alternatives,
especially public transit. And they want to be confident that transportation
law respects clean-air standards, supports alternatives like walking and
cycling, and undergirds our communities.

it's a straightforward deal. But it probably can't move into gear until the
highway lobby and its political buddies agree to clear the road.



Neal Peirce's column appears alternate Mondays on editorial pages of
The Times. His e-mail address is nrp@citistates.com