Villaraigosa has bullish plan for rail transit projects

If Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has his way, Los Angeles County is about to embark on a commuter rail building boom the likes of which the region has never seen.

On Friday, the mayor will unveil an ambitious but politically risky transportation plan that fast-tracks several high-profile rail projects to be completed within the next decade. That’s a big speed-up because officials have generally been talking about completing them within 30 years.

Villaraigosa has made building more rail a top priority of his administration — though he’s the first to admit it’s going to take more than speeches and good intentions to get it done.

“Yes this is a stretch-goal, yes this is going to be tough, but I think by now folks shouldn’t count me out,” Villaraigosa told The Times in an interview.

“The fact is that this is the most important thing that we can do to alleviate congestion and gridlock, to improve the quality of our air and to really vindicate the people’s will for the need to address transportation,” he said.

The mayor scored a big victory last year when voters approved a sales tax measure to help fund the projects, which include a subway to the Westside, the extension of the Gold Line in the San Gabriel Valley, the extension of the Expo Line to Santa Monica and new rail lines down Crenshaw Boulevard and through downtown L.A.

The mayor’s office estimates that the revenue from Measure R and other available funds would provide only an estimated $5.2 billion if they were to expedite the projects. The rest would have to come from private sector partners, the federal government or other public funding. 

Villaraigosa has made it clear he thinks the Westside subway — by far the most expensive project with a price tag of $5 billion to $6 billion — is his top priority. That has sparked conflict with backers of other rail projects demanding that their lines be given equal consideration.

By fast-tracking projects throughout the region, the mayor could ease those concerns — but only if enough money is available. And that remains an open question.

The mayor’s office says the county needs at least $10 billion in additional funds to complete the projects in 10 years. The first step, he said, is building a regional coalition to promote the project.

Then the hard part — finding sources of funding, whether in the form of public-private partnerships or money from the federal government in the form of a no-interest loan, among other ways, the mayor’s office said.

Villaraigosa said he thinks the federal government would be more likely to give Los Angeles County money for the project than other cities because of the passage of Measure R.

He also thinks it will be an attractive offer because, during tough economic times, it would create thousands of jobs much faster than originally planned.

Art Leahy, chief executive of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, said that, hypothetically, if there was sufficient funding, the agency would be able to accelerate projects and that it may be cheaper to expedite projects now because “right now we’re in a period of relatively low construction costs.”

Villaraigosa will discuss the plan for the first time Friday at the Los Angeles Business Council’s 2009 Mayoral Housing, Transportation and Jobs Summit at UCLA.

He will tell the group that “30 years is too long” to wait and that all 12 transit projects he wants to expedite can be built in a decade. It’s called the “30/10” plan, and he will joke that some might say he’s “coming up with another dream.”

“The projects are going to happen, there’s no question about that, and I’m going to be very aggressive at getting federal funds.... My goal is to make it happen sooner rather than later,” Villaraigosa said. “I recognize that it’s a daunting task, but I love the challenge and I’m up for it.”

--Ari B. Bloomekatz

Comments

[Hairy Carrion]

Let's hope that they keep their heads and not use imminent domain here as an excuse to gentrify (not just the dreaded white folk, developers mainly who shove Gap, Starbucks and other crap down our throats) communities around the rail projects. That being said, it's long past time that L.A. build a comprehensive rail system, one that makes sense and gets people where they need to go. As it stands currently, the rail system is stupid. Unlike most major metropolitan areas around the globe, you can't get to various work centers, the beach, the airport, the West Side in general, etc. Even in Oakland you can use Bart to get to the freaking airport.

[Toby]

It's a great idea if the funding and entire project is manage properly. We are one of the few if not only large urban center in the nation that does not have a train/subway system that reaches LAX. The Westside is a priority, but what about our airport? So. California 's tourism generates billions of dollars to our state's economy. Adding freeway lanes, carpools, double sized metro buses barely make a dent in our traffic problems, we need to improve our public transportation system to coordinate with trains/subways/buses, and create a staggered hour business model (apart from 9-5). Lastly, we need our transit system to connect, it's ridiculous that you have to get off Union Station to connect to another train or bus etc.

[Shannon]

I am so excited about this possibility. I spent about 5 years on the east coast and fell in love with the car-free lifestyle in Philadelphia and NYC. Walking around and being able to explore new areas of the city, without a thought towards traffic or parking. When I moved back home to LA, this has been the number one thing that I miss.

As an aside, I would be willing to bet that having viable, clean, fast public transit would have a powerful effect on reducing obesity as well. Get everyone out of the sitting in their car, sitting at their desk, sitting in their car cycle that eats up a huge portion of everyone's day.

[alex]

If the subway is so great, why does the mayor have to lie when promoting it? No rail line built to date in Los Angeles has ever been shown to have lessened traffic congestion or shown to have improved air quality. None. Not even a little bit. If rail did these things then places like New York, London, and Washington DC with lots of rail would have the least traffic congestion and the best air quality, but they don't. The only true reason to build rail is to create jobs and stimulate real estate development. That's why Villaroigosa wants the subway -- his real estate buddies are salivating at the thought of building skyscrapers all over the Westside. I hope that's what all those in favor of the subway really want, because once this subway goes ahead the Westside will never be the same.

[Stacy Lumbrezer]

I agree! Let's git 'er done fast! The city needs it! Just try and drive somewhere right now in Friday gridlock - the subway's a better way!

[Warren]

I like the plan. I just hope Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa spend all the money in the City of Los Angeles. Unless, the City of Los Angeles is responsible to repay the $10 Billion of loans he is seeking.

[Doug]

A world-class city needs at least second class public transportation. The longer we wait to build it the more expensive it will be. The more places the subway goes the more people who will take it. Businesses, residents and tourists will benefit. Also, the commute will be better for those who work in these areas.

[Dan W.]

"I hope that's what all those in favor of the subway really want, because once this subway goes ahead the Westside will never be the same."

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

We've already had development on the Westside, or perhaps you haven't noticed.

The golden days of the car culture are long behind us.

Anybody who wants a car-only transportation lifestyle, where you drive and park your single-occupancy vehicle cheaply and conveniently on demand, anytime, anyplace, anywhere has two options.

1) Move to the actual suburbrs. (Note: The Westside is NOT a suburb, but an increasing job center in its own right. Santa Monica's daytime population is 2-1/2 times its nighttime population)

2) Invent a time machine so you can go back to Sam Yorty's Los Angeles when the freeways and streets were mostly unclogged. Good luck with that one.

No one is entitled to a cheap and convenient car-only transportation lifestyle in the middle of a major metropolitan world-class city.

[LAofAnaheim]

Alex...you're right. We will get more real estate development, more density, and more traffic. No doubt about it. But............we're building alternatives, so people can take the subway to destinations. Subways never reduce traffic. Have you seen the traffic in London, New York, Paris? It's worse than LA. But you don't hear about it because of the massive subway system. We're building the same here. With more alternative modes of transportation, more buildings/housing can sprout up along the corridor offering less car space and more density. More development doesn't bring traffic...it's the humongous parking garages that offer free and convenient parking that do!

[Ryan]

can we get Mayor Villaroga to speak to OC Mayors to get it built down here. The damn Republicans down here don't want it because it might be socialist.

[Ryan]

Can we get Mayor Villaraigosa to speak to OC mayors to convince them to create rail, link it to LA so we can have one huge regional rail system. The Republicans don't want it down here because it might foster socialism, and want to save the SUV.

[SouthBayKen]

"Let's get to be like New York"...I don't think we want to be like New York. (I lived there). When I think of transit cities I'd like to model our system it would be starting here in the U.S.: San Francisco and across the Pacific: Tokyo. In the latter's case, clean, wide-spread, A/C underground, and efficient mode of transportation with mixed-use developments aplenty. If we become "like New York"...sad commentary.....
Lets get behind Mayor V. and move on and work together to at least speed up 1/2 if not most of the plan in 10 -12 years..we can do it...this isn't a pipe dream. Win-win...we need s concentrated and focused Stimuli II for transit/infrastructure projects that will leave a legacy such as the WPA did back in the 1930's...Bay Bridge, Golden Gate Bridge, Hoover Dam, etc....$10BN to truly bring a real alternative to the automobile for Angelenos and tourists = jobs for the unemployed, increased business spending, and should bring more tech firms to give L.A. a shot....Stimuli I = disappointment in terms of mass transit funding for L.A. and other deservedly cities.

[dlee]

I’m glad to hear this, and I think this is long overdue. I hope it will improve commuting in the Los Angeles area. But I have to say the current rail system is disappointing. As I believe someone else already noted, the Green Line doesn’t go directly to LAX. That was a mistake. And if I wanted to go from Long Beach to Pasadena, I have to transfer from the Blue Line to the Red Line to the Gold Line. That’s light rail to subway to light rail. Why didn’t the MTA design just one line that started in Long Beach and ended in Pasadena? That’s how BART’s rail lines are designed in the San Francisco Bay Area. You can go on the same train from Pittsburg or Dublin, the two stations furthest east, all the way to Daly City, the station furthest west. If you want to go to Richmond or Fremont, you simply transfer to other lines that run north and south. I know that rapid transit is more expensive than light rail, but I think it will have more use than light rail. It definitely goes faster than light rail.

[syscom3]

Ryan, we do have a rail line that connects to Los Angeles. Its called Metrolink. And its quite popular.

[RichDavid]

The City is running a $1,000,000 per day deficit and the mayor is in way over his head. All his promises sound good but the reality is he can't make anything happen and this won't happen either. He should resign now before he bankrupts the city.

[John A. Mozzer]

When I lived in New York City, I took advantage of cross-platform local and express subway service. I'd often wait in the middle of the platform, and take whichever train came first. If I needed a local train but got on the express, often the express would catch up and pass a local train which I could switch to farther down the line. At late night hours, when the tracks of New York's 24-hour system were forever under maintenance, taking a re-routed train was common -- inconvenient, but at least I could still get to where I needed to go. Going home from Manhattan to Brooklyn at night, the F train would often use express tracks and pass my local stop. I'd have to back track, but at least I still got home. This makes me wonder about our proposed rail system here in Los Angeles, without a combination of express and local tracks, without multiple levels, without alternative lines. Los Angeles will have outgrown the proposed system before it is completed.

[JJ]

I'll see it when I believe it. LA Metro can't even get TAP right. No way to put in cash value except to buy a day pass, and the only places they sell these are shady liquor stores.

In Boston, I can grab a CharlieCard at Logan Airport, load up with as much money as I want through a charging machine with my credit card, and TAP my way through the city's public transporation system.

In Tokyo, I can buy a Suica card at Narita, load it up with as much as I want at a charging machine and tap my way throughout the cities' system.

But here in LA, I have to drive all the way to Culver City to get a TAP card to load it up with cash value. Metro only sells day passes and they don't have charging stations anywhere.

Umm, hello? For the infrequent bus and train rider, I don't want a day/week/monthly pass, I'd rather just load it up with $100 and use it as cash fare and reload it up later when I've used it all. That's how it's done elsewhere but no...LA wants to try something different. Plain stupidity.

And what is with this expiration date BS? LA is the only city that is stupid enough to put expiry dates on these things. My London OysterCard has no expiry date, my Boston CharlieCard has no expiry date, my Suica has none, my HK OctopusCard nor my Seoul Metro T-Money card has one. These cards are built to last for over ten years (my Suica dates back from 2002 and it still works!) but LA has this stupid three year expiration period. So they're forcing people to get new ones every three years even though it lasts longer. More waste for our landfills, eh? Geniuses, I tell ya.

Oh what am I saying? There are no geniuses in the LA Metro system. How can there be one when they couldn't figure out to build a direct rail link to LAX in the first place? Oh LAX is only what, like the EIGHTH BUSIEST AIRPORT IN THE WORLD?! Yeah, let's not create a rail link there. People will figure out a way. Nevermind that cities like St. Louis can figure the practicality of having a direct airport rail link but LA can't

How is a tourist from overseas gonna use the transportation system in LA? They have no means to get around with the mess right now. And it may come to a shock to us Angelinos, but not everyone knows how to drive a car! Yes! It's true! A lot of people in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong don't even own drivers licenses because their public transportation is great that they have no need for a car. How is a tourist from these regions supposed to get around in LA when everyone just gives directions in freeway exits and no one knows directions by public transportation? They don't sell TAP passes at the airport, there's no rail link to/from the airport, bus stops are hard to find, etc. etc.

And for a city of this size to rely only on light rail and buses? What brilliant minds are working at LA Metro? LA is what like only big in area as the entire Tokyo Metropolitan Area!? Buses that go on the same streets as the rest of the traffic, in fact buses are the problem of traffic in LA. And we have these dinky little light rails overground that makes slow tight turns, with seats facing the same direction causing a pile up wasted space in the aisles. They can't figure out that seats need to be parallel to the window so as to create more aisle space for standing passengers!

There's no hope for public transportation in LA. It's a total loss and there's no way it'll ever be as they hope to be. Too many NIMBYs now and LA is too overdeveloped for any real improvement anymore. It could've been done twenty years ago when LA wasn't this overdeveloped, but we're too late. It's gonna cost us trillions to get anything done of this sheer size in a decade.

We might as well just wait for the big one to flatten LA to rubbles and start a new then.

[jay]

why not build a monorail to the sea. it is way cheaper and faster to build. that extra money can be allocated to other projects