Transportation links

Here are 10 recent stories on transportation or related subjects that caught me eye. Some are local, some aren't, but all have relevance in the Southland:

Something to look forward to? Presidential candidates causing traffic jams this fall on fund-raising trips to the Southland. LAObserved from Kevin Roderick's weekly KCRW radio gig.

Prominent group yanks support of N.Y. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver because he wouldn't allow Mayor Bloomberg's congestion pricing plan to go to a vote last year. N.Y. Daily News. Newsday editorial says much the same.

Scooters and motorcycles aren't as green as some say and those two-strokes are big polluters. EcoModder

Residents of Manchester, UK, get to vote in December whether to impose congestion pricing on themselves. Transport Briefing

Pasadena Star-News editorial says Villaraigosa failed to bring together consensus on sales tax and blame him for costing the Gold Line $324 million in federal funds. My note on that: the $324 million has neither been authorized or appropriated by Congress, but Gold Line could compete for those funds if MTA first provides $80 million in funding.

Cyclists starting to see some benefits from employers. Wired

Want to plug your car into electricity from clean-coal one day? Andrew Revkin runs the numbers on clean coal at NYT's Dot Earth blog. Bottom line: It all depends on what you mean by 'clean.'

U.S. EPA criticizes U.S. DOT over fuel economy standards for cars. Associated Press

School kids are crowding NYC's subway platforms again and Subwayblogger says the trick is figuring out which train door they're going to use and avoiding it.

The Gristmill does a roundup on Gov. Sarah Palin and her environmental policies. The word 'oil' appears often.

Finally, a big thank you to the Matthew Barrett and company at the Metro library who provide daily roundups of links. It's an invaluable service and transit-minded readers should check out their expansive website.

--Steve Hymon

Comments

[BOB2]

Dana,

The Gold Line is ready for certification of the environmental, so the new start application can be filed. An earmark has been under active bipartisan discussion for two years, and could include Phase II of Expo. The only thing holding up this up is MTA's refusal to commit to operate the system. MTA's repeated lies in various letters do not help build the trust and good will that will be required for a positive vote by 2/3 of the electorate for Measure R.

If Measure R fails, maybe you and SOCATA will think about holding MTA accountable? Because, MTA's Board majority and management failuure to build consensus with the voters/taxpayers, beyond the folks in downtown LA and the westside (out where to other 3/4 of the voters/taxpayers reside?) will be the reason why it will have failed.

[forgotten citizen]

The problem with LA public transportation is terrible system which require decades just to be on track. The problem is even worst in SGV. It is lacking any mean of public transportation. I agree many SGV ppl go to West side to work. I had lots job interview at west LA. I got the job in Marina del rey 12 years ago. Since I am single, it makes me easier to move to Mar Vista. With the construction of Expo and Goldline extension, I may have to move again if I get the job in west LA (rising rent may prevent me to move). the problem is transportation after expo, and how i am going to get to goldline extension. OK I should not be selfish. Can anyone living near Goldline extension future station mention if that is going to benefit. People living in Pasadena will benefit. Even before the goldline, the bus system in Pasadena was way better than other areas in SGV. I think the better proppsal (which i have seen in the blog) is extension to Monterey park. I don't benefit. I live in Walnut, but it helps more ppl. or better, create 2 short godline extension, one to Monterey Park or little bit further, one shrink the current goldline extension. Later we will expand. I have been taking buses for 20 years. Everytime i go outside my area in la , it takes more 3 hours. I like subway everywhere, but i know it is not doable. get the right subway built with. i know additional lines in Westside will benefit many ppl, but in SGV, we have nothing. You cannot blame us for saying unequitable. The problem is how we going to get goldline extension, After expo, how we are going to get to our work places. Not all the places in W LA will be within 1 hour walking distance from the future Expo line. if we are late coming back, basically, we have very limit bus to take. In W la, there are at least rapid transit and some freq buses (like i said, i know more ppl live in that area, so it makes sense). here we don't have

[CS]

Back to the Gold Line again.

Let get this straight. First, both eastbound and westbound of the 10 is congested every work week because people coming from the east is going to work/school on the westside. People from the westside is going to work, most likely in downtown. So my point is that the subway benefits all. It will even benefit the Gold Line when the subway is extended via increase ridership. Actually, I'm betting that the whole eastside of the County will see an increase ridership on the Gold Line, FT, and Metrolink. But we all know this so lets move on.

Ok now to SGV. Are you really going to put your project into the hands of politicians? 80 mil will get you into the game but will it get you the win. I mean yeah its 300 mil plus change of federal money. But you get a better deal if the measure pass, 700 mill. plus change. I believe that get you to Claremont instead of Azusa. Come on politicians will lie to benefit them and not their voters. With this sales tax measure, you the voters can decide if you want more money for the Gold Line. Its up to you. Frankly I rather vote for this measure than trust any politicians. Its never a slam dunk with politicians or the federal government.

[Dana Gabbard]

"My note on that: the $324 million has neither been authorized or appropriated by Congress, but Gold Line could compete for those funds if MTA first provides $80 million in funding."

I don't believe that is true. I believe the San Gabriel Valley Congressional delegation is engaged in a mass delusion along with the local stakeholders out there. Their project's cost benefit numbers are very poor to compete for federal funding, much less the windfall they so confidently predict. All the political mojo in the world cannot overcome the project's projected ridership being lackluster and the cost (which approaches 2 BILLION dollars to run it all the way to Ontario) unbalanced versus other regional priorities.

If the project on its own merits warranted this sort of treatment, there would be no need for all the fuss and exaggeration. Draw your own conclusions.

[Cahwyguy - Daniel]

Another thing I don't remember you discussing, but I found when updating my pages. The CTC selected the alternative for the 405 based on the final EIR. There's lots of good information in their agenda item at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/transprog/ctcbooks/2008/0608/063_2.2c1.pdf