Coming up February 14: the public comment period closes for the Southern California Association of Governments Draft 2012 Regional Transportation Plan and its Program Environmental Impact Report. The San Gabriel Valley Economic Partnership’s legislative committee has voiced concerns about the RTP’s proposed elevated truck route along the I-60, dedicated to moving goods containers inland. In an email blast, the SGVEP says, “Congestion on the I-60 is affecting distribution and needs to be addressed but the project as originally proposed has issues that need to be addressed as well…”

The No 710 Action Committee, the Coalition for a Safe Environment, and others also object to the plan’s impacts, and argue that funds should be allocated instead to zero-emission, electrified rail for goods movement. A new RAND Corporation study Highway Infrastructure and the Economy, concludes that “In restructuring U.S. transportation policy, Congress should steer funding toward projects of ‘national significance’…’that have positive net benefits dispersed over large geographic areas.’” Eliminating thousands of diesel truck trips on urban roadways daily, which an electrified rail system would do, would have such benefits for this entire region.

Elected officials can no longer kick the can down the road, so they need to stop focusing on roads! We need to invest in projects that will improve air quality, reduce congestion, enhance public health and the environment, and provide 21st century transportation jobs. We don’t need more highways and freeways and trucks in Southern California.

The 2012 SCAG Regional Transportation Plan has just been released in draft form. Below, links to this and other policy discussions about the future of transportation in Southern California, plus a plug for the 2008 book Smogtown:

Southern California Association of Governments 2012 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy – the draft version was released two weeks ago; a final four-year plan will be adopted by April 2012. The plan calls for/estimates completion of the 710 tunnel by 2030, and also includes greatly expanded funding for bicycling/pedestrian infrastructure. See page 186 for a “public participation” visual featuring Glendale Safe and Healthy Street’s Colin Bogart. The comment period for this draft plan is December 2011 – January 2012.

The Value of Transportation Enhancements; Or, Are Walking and Cycling Really Transportation? – argues that U.S. federal surface transportation spending should include bicycling and pedestrian “enhancements” because these contribute to better, less congested roadways, therefore better mobility, as well as improved health and safety.

Retrofitting Suburbia: Updated Urban Design Solutions – discusses the problem of “under-performing asphalt” and possible solutions to overdeveloped suburban spaces.

Smogtown (and authors’ blog) – The 2008 book is a compelling history of smog in LA, and mentions times planes couldn’t land because of the smog. In today’s LA Times, there is an article about the same problem now in China. Do we want to go backwards or forwards? The history in Smogtown is a great argument against relaxing Clean Air and other environmental standards, and for zero-emission approaches to transportation infrastructure including port technology and freight movement.

Happy New Year under blue skies in Southern California!

The transportation contractors, businesses, and agencies gathered last week at Mobility 21 focused on sending a message to the federal government that funding for transportation infrastructure projects is necessary for the U.S. to remain globally competitive.

Funding for bicycling and walking infrastructure in the long-term reauthorization bill will be more difficult as budget struggles continue. Bicycle and pedestrian projects, like the demonstration project and policies set in place by the Glendale Safe and Healthy Streets Plan, create more jobs per dollar than highway-only projects. They provide a huge return on investment, they offer health benefits as well as transit options, and their presence is a direct antidote for traffic congestion.

These are difficult times, and Congress is looking for ways to cut spending, but cutting programs that are forward-looking and offer health and economic benefits as well as transportation alternatives to regions like Southern California which are now determined to remake themselves as liveable urban environments is a big mistake. Contact Congressional representatives today to voice support for alternative transportation funding, or TE, as this vote could take place as soon as Wednesday.

Some of Najarian’s comments:

“I don’t think that the 710 Tunnel is a viable project to solve the congestion concerns we have, for several reasons. We talk about a gap, the missing link, and SCAG has referred to it as the only missing link…but there are freeways throughout the county that have not been built. To describe the 710 as “the” missing link is a fallacy…Communities have stood up, and rightly so, against many projects. We are a democracy and we protect and cherish the local voices.”

The other issue I have is the cost…The big problem I have is that there is a ‘tipping point’ for the tunnel. If it gets to be greater than $3 billion (I’ve heard inside the MTA), it will fail. The PPP report says if this cost is higher than $5 billion, it will fail. It doesn’t make sense as a community to spend the millions of dollars on consultants, on the finance people, on the engineers, on the outreach people, who are eating their way through that money by the tens of millions of dollars as we speak, only to find years down the road that this is too expensive a project and isn’t feasible.”

Other elected officials gave their views on the tunnel during introductory remarks, with 44th District representative Anthony Portantino saying, “It’s no secret that I don’t support the 710 Tunnel,” and Duarte City Council member John Fasana stating that voter support of Measure R implied support of the 710 Tunnel project.

Najarian was the only elected official who participated in the program sessions. He sat on the second panel discussing 710 expansion ‘guiding principles.’ Other panelists were Metro Highway Program Director Douglas Failing and Parsons Brinkerhoff VP Dr. Eugene Kim. Dr. Kim surprised the audience with his contention that the 710 tunnel should be built, but shouldn’t accommodate truck traffic.

The earlier session of the morning featured Metro Board member Richard Katz, Metrolink CEO John Fenton, and Transit Coalition Director Bart Reed, and although the topic was ‘a sustainable transportation future’ the 710 controversy came up as a question about ‘NIMBY’ resistance to proposed projects.

South Pasadena resident Janet Ervin commented, “Although it was good to see that many people are interested in transportation issues affecting our region, the apparent insistence to ‘close the 710 gap’ shows that Caltrans and Metro have made their decision. They are simply going to provide that data which supports their predetermined plan. They know that a tunnel will not relieve commuter traffic, nor will it be able to handle the increased freight traffic from the ports.”

The tremendous benefits of the project have impressed groups from Long Beach, where advocates are concerned with the link between pollution and childhood asthma; to East LA, where jobs and urban renewal are desperately needed; to the No 710 Action Committee, whose communities will be affected by a strong surge in truck traffic and who have pushed for “21st century alternatives” to freight transport in Southern California.

The port facility would be the first of its kind in the world with no fossil fuel emissions. The encompassing GRID is a paradigm-changing, futuristic alternative to conventional port expansion and freeway extension projects including the 710 Tunnel. Costs would be shared among many industries and communities benefiting from the system, in contrast to 6 current projects** linked only to future container traffic capacity in Southern California with cost estimates ranging higher than $22 billion.

Rather than a piecemeal approach to infrastructure, the GRID Project links international trade, goods movement, personal transportation alternatives, energy delivery, and extra space for new urban residential developments. New pipes built inside the river levies will be the path for underground rail tracks as well as electricity transmission. The concept requires no property condemnation, and would actually free up land occupied by port facilities and utility towers.

With a trench already in place, other pipes could carry desalinated water upstream. Above the freight lines, a light rail system could be installed following the same river route and providing connections to many intersecting lines, including the Gold Line east extension.

This is a grand scheme, involving the port, major construction and engineering interests, utilities, manufacturers, transportation agencies, and state and federal support. David Alba, who formerly worked at the port of Long Beach, conceived this plan and is promoting it to groups throughout the region with the support of Richard Mueller, President of Ameron International’s Water Transmission Group.

Alba and Mueller believe this is “A Project of A National Significance” that could attract billions in federal funding and assist the Southern California area in maintaining a premier port facility that can compete successfully with the new port Punta Colonet in Mexico and the planned 2014 expansion of the Panama Canal.

The backers believe this grand project could spark a “manufacturing renaissance that we need in this country” and propose that the project require U.S. contractors and suppliers. They also say it could also inspire big projects in other U.S. cities capitalizing on sustainable infrastructure, new technology, and underutilized assets.

Sunroom Desk will be following developments on this dramatic alternative to the 710 Tunnel and conventional freeway and port expansion projects in Southern California. The project may come up at this Saturday’s One Community meeting. 710 Tunnel opponent and Glendale mayor Ara Najarian is one of the panelists.

NOTES:
Thanks to David Alba for the port facility image and PowerPoint slide.

**6 conventional projects currently on the table:
1. 710 Tunnel
2. 710 Widening
3. Union Pacific Intermodal Container Transport Facility
4. BNSF Intermodal Container Tranport Facility
5. Port of Long Beach Expansion
6. Port of Long Beach Midharbor Project

Recent news coverage:
Residents Discuss Alternative to 710 Freeway Projects
A new wave against 710 tunnel

Assemblyman Anthony Portantino wrote that residents need to act and speak up in 710 Tunnel could devastate the region, published in the latest La Canada Sun.

Another call to action came over radio waves September 22 as KRLA’s Kevin James interviewed Janet Dodson of the Historic Highland Park Neighborhood Council. Dodson said the project “is absolutely stoppable at this point. The coalition against the 710 is struggling at every stage. At the moment the MTA is continuing along with environmental impact reports, after they’ve jumped several steps. They’ve moved on past EIRs when they should not have. Public pressure is hugely important here.” Listen to that interview segment here.

Dodson also mentions the Green Scissors’ 2010 Report. Scroll to page 16 to see the tunnel project listed. The complete report “identifies more than $200 billion in wasteful government subsidies that are damaging to the environment and harmful to consumers.”

The “Focusing Resources, Economic Investment, and Guidance to Help Transportation (FREIGHT) Act of 2010” was introduced this week by U.S. Senators Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), Patty Murray (D-WA), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA). The Act would create a grant program for freight-specific infrastructure projects, such as freight rail capacity expansion projects, and highway projects that improve access to freight facilities.

A national debate, and a new executive agency focusing on freight movement alternatives and environmental impacts, could have a strong impact on the 710 Tunnel proposal.

In March, Oxy Alum Janette Sadik-Khan (’82), currently New York City’s Transportation Commissioner, spoke at her alma mater March 18 on changing urban streetscapes. Sadik-Khan answered questions about Manhattan’s success with bicycling and pedestrian street improvements. Sadik-Khan also spoke on KPCC’s “Air Talk” and addressed the 2010 LA Street Summit. Huffington Post featured the NYC Commissioner’s Southern California visit prominently in a column about real signs of change in the car-centered orientation of Southern California.

Local blogs also featured Sadik-Khan’s visit as an indication of building momentum for bicycling and pedestrian initiatives:

Glendale Safe and Healthy Streets preview of Occidental College lecture and LA Street Summit – March 5, 2010.

New York has the edge in learning to share the road (but Southern California is ready to get some cars out of busy lanes as well) – Culture Monster, LA Times blogs, March 25, 2010.

Carless Streets and Creative Thinking: What LA Can Learn from NYC – Curbed LA, March 19.

NYC Commissioner Says L.A. Should Quickly Move on Transportation Pilot Programs – LAist, March 19.

Sadik-Khan Packs the House, Then Brings it Down – LA Streetsblog, March 19.

LA Times columnist Michael Hiltzik discussed 2010 state ballot initiatives following a morning presentation (summarized in the previous post) for Pasadena’s League of Women Voters. He will speak again on the subject with Center for Governmental Studies President Robert Stern at a Tuesday, November 10 ACLU forum in Pasadena.

Stern is co-author of the state’s Political Reform Act of 1974, former Staff to the California Legislature’s Assembly Elections Committee, and former General Counsel to California’s Fair Political Practices Commission.

Among the questions Hiltzik and Stern will address: Is California really ungovernable? Is reducing California’s super majority vote requirement (to increase taxes and adopt budgets) political infeasible? Will convening a constitutional convention simply open Pandora’s box? Stern will also cover pros and cons of various reforms likely to be on the 2010 ballot.

The forum will be held at 7 p.m., November 10, at Neighborhood Unitarian Universalist Church, Ross Chapel, 301 N. Orange Grove Blvd., Pasadena. Pasadena Weekly also has details.

The Glendale News Press featured the award of $26.5 million in Environmental Protection Agency grants to “retrofit and replace diesel engines in construction vehicles, cargo-handling equipment, school buses, heavy-duty trucks and locomotives in Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino and Riverside counties.”

The LA Times reported that 1,000 mayors across the U.S. agreed to meet Kyoto protocol targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, signing an agreement which was announced at the conclusion of the U.S. Conference of Mayors. (Glendale does not appear on the list of 133 California cities.)

The Wall Street Journal wrote about carbon emission regulatory schemes and their implications for energy companies last week: Articles Monday and Tuesday focused on utilities quitting membership in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce because of its stance on climate change legislation. By the end of the week Nike had quit as well. The journal article commented:

In a way, Nike’s protest was easier to see coming than the departure of PG&E, PNM, and Exelon. Nike is one of the members of the BICEP coalition, or Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy.

That group—which includes other big-name companies such as Levi Strauss, Starbucks, and Sun Microsystems—has been urging tough climate legislation since it was created; none of its members are power companies or other firms that would be in the cross-hairs of climate legislation.

And yesterday, CSpan discussed with Senator Barbara Boxer the Senate climate change bill she introduced last week.