Anti-monorail signatures stand Seattle Times June 19, 2004 A judge yesterday rejected the Seattle Monorail Project’s request to throw out 9,600 petition signatures that opponents already have collected for anti-monorail Initiative 83. That request came during a court hearing on a challenge to the I-83 ballot title, which was drafted by the City Attorney’s Office in cautious legal language. The original version was titled “Initiative Measure Number 83 Concerns the Use of City Streets for New Monorail Facilities.” Monorail officials said the wording was too vague, and King County Superior Court Judge Steven Gonzalez agreed it could be clearer � so yesterday he rewrote the title to say the initiative concerns “prohibiting” the new monorail on city streets. He also rewrote a summary of the initiative to clarify that it would block plans for the proposed Green Line. Then a monorail-agency attorney, Paul Lawrence of Preston, Gates & Ellis, argued that the original petitions should be deemed invalid. But Gonzalez replied that unless somebody could prove a significant number of voters were misled or misunderstood what they were signing, he would let the signatures stand. The founder of Monorail Recall, Tim Wulf, accused the monorail agency of contesting the ballot language purely as a ploy to make the opponents start from zero again in their signature drive. Earlier this week, treasurer Liv Finne predicted that if the names were voided, “we won’t make it to the ballot by November.” Monorail officials deny such a motivation. Polling shows their plan is popular enough that fewer people would sign a petition or vote for I-83 if they understood it would mean repealing the project, according to Anne Levinson, Seattle Monorail Project’s deputy director. After claiming a groundswell of public sentiment to halt the monorail, I-83 organizers have found a petition drive more difficult than expected. So far, most signatures were collected by volunteers, but Finne said the group has paid a Tacoma firm $16,500 to gather 5,000 more. Monorail Recall began using the new version of its petitions yesterday, Wulf said. Peter Sherwin, spokesman for Monorail Now, said any petition campaign using multiple versions could violate city laws. “They shouldn’t be going forward under any illusions about this,” he said. I-83 seeks to ban or revoke city permits to build the monorail in city right- of-way. It would kill the voter-approved 14-mile Green Line to link downtown with Ballard and West Seattle. On Monday, the Seattle City Council voted 8-1 to allow the monorail’s planned alignment, which includes a curve through Seattle Center and a train corridor 14 feet from buildings on Second Avenue. The council votes June 28 on an agreement to cover insurance liability, financial guarantees, skybridges and street improvements around the stations. The monorail agency has filed another lawsuit, saying I-83 is illegally using the initiative process to change a land-use decision. The agency was joined in both suits by pro-monorail landowners, environmentalists and others, including former Gov. Dan Evans and Earth Day founder Denis Hayes. “We still think we have a very strong case, and we’d like to get that resolved as quickly as possible,” said Ross Macfarlane, chief counsel for the monorail. He said the agency hopes to sell bonds during the fall, and court wins would remove uncertainties � allowing bonds to be sold at lower interest rates and less cost to taxpayers. The monorail project and a car-tab tax to support it were approved by Seattle voters in 2002 by only 877 votes. City Councilman Peter Steinbrueck, a recent convert to the pro-monorail side, said he didn’t see a huge opposition movement emerging. “I have no sense this has lost the confidence of the Seattle voters,” he said. Monorail Recall originated last winter with Wulf, a Fauntleroy-area resident who objected to the tax. He has been joined by architects who dislike the bulk of overhead tracks, and by business owners who could lose parking, retail space or views. The campaign’s largest donor is developer Martin Selig, who provided $9,000 of the group’s $22,030, as of Monday. Jeffrey Ochsner, a University of Washington architecture professor, donated $2,000, and West Seattle property owner Fred Kettlewell gave $1,000.

Accepting the risk Whistler Question [BC] June 19, 2004 This Friday, the Translink board of directors is scheduled to meet to reconsider its earlier rejection of the RAV (Richmond-Airport-Vancouver) rapid-transit project in light of the provincial government’s offer to accept liability for cost overruns and/or ridership shortfalls. It’s an issue that should be of concern to every British Columbian, not just those in the Lower Mainland. Several weeks ago, Translink directors voted 7-5 to reject the RAV proposal, citing the potential for cost overruns. This month, Premier Gordon Campbell and Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon announced their proposal to accept responsibility for overruns and urged the directors to reconsider their decision. Make no mistake: By itself, if it goes ahead, the RAV line is not going to make or break Vancouver and the Lower Mainland as a good place to live. However, alleviating traffic congestion and reducing the number of trips people take in private vehicles is an extremely desirable and necessary goal which would be well-served by such a project. One only has to wait in bumper-to-bumper traffic along Oak, Granville or Cambie streets a few times to recognize that the amount of pollution from the idling vehicles in that congested corridor is unacceptable in a world-class city. The RAV line would help alleviate some of that stress on the area’s infrastructure and environment �not to mention other indexes such as Canada’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. This week, however, the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation (CTF) urged Translink directors to “consider all of the province’s taxpayers and reject the provincial government’s repeated promises.” The group said that the essentials of the project haven’t changed � “all that is different is that the provincial government has offered up the wallets of the entire province, not just the Lower Mainland.” None of those contentions can be disputed. However, we would argue with the CTF in its contention that “this could be the Liberal version of the fast ferries project.” That fiasco became so because the fast ferries simply didn’t work well and were clearly not worth the money spent on them. Light-rail rapid transit, on the other hand, is a proven technology that works well, in Vancouver and in just about every major city on the planet. A well-planned, extensive and convenient light-rail transit system is therefore an asset that will pay big dividends for many decades to come. A separate line linking the airport to downtown would also be an asset to showcase during the 2010 Olympics and beyond. The Province has committed $300 million to the project, as have Translink and Vancouver Airport Authority. The Feds have committed $450 million. That kind of money for much-needed infrastructure projects doesn’t come along everyday. Sure, it’s a risk, but in our view an acceptable one. Spreading the cost of any overruns among all B.C. taxpayers is an acknowledgment of the importance of Vancouver as B.C.’s economic hub. RAV is a long-term project that won’t get off the ground i f we become mired in short-term thinking.

BILL TAPS SALES TAX TO FUND TRANSIT Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania) June 19, 2004 A proposal before the Legislature would earmark additional state sales tax money for public transit, ending the chronic budget woes of the Port Authority and other ailing transit systems. “We’ve worked years for something like this,” said Paul Skoutelas, chief executive officer for the Port Authority. The Port Authority’s share of the additional $282 million would be $63.5 million in the first full year, enough to cover a projected $30 million shortfall for the 2004-05 fiscal year and keep buses, trolleys and transit facilities in sound repair. Skoutelas said if the proposal succeeds, it should enable the authority to maintain current fares and service levels “for the foreseeable future” and end uncertainty for the agency, which provides 250,000 bus, light rail, incline and paratransit rides per day. Skoutelas praised lawmakers and also credited an advisory group of riders, the Allegheny County Transit Council, and an activist group, Save Our Transit, which has staged public demonstrations in Pittsburgh and Harrisburg. Frozen or reduced state operating assistance forced the Port Authority to raise the base cash fare from $1.25 to $1.60 in 2001 and to $1.75 in 2002. It almost forced the authority to raise the fare to $2 last year and eliminate weekend, holiday and night service. Gov. Ed Rendell restored operating cuts last year and authorized a one-time infusion of $10 million in special highway funds. Combined with $5 million in administrative cuts, that enabled the Port Authority to limp along, albeit not without talking about a $2 base fare again and yet another fare increase Jan. 1, 2005. The legislation, announced in Philadelphia last week, was described in Pittsburgh yesterday at a news conference at the Downtown end of the Martin Luther King Jr. East Busway by a bipartisan delegation of state senators and representatives led by Sen. Jay Costa Jr., D-Forest Hills. “The short and sweet of it is that it will provide significant increases for mass transit,” said Costa, a member of the Senate Transportation Committee. He noted the state has not increased transit assistance in six of the past nine years, causing systems to raise fares and cut service — “not the answer,” he said. A colleague, Sen. Sean Logan, D-Monroeville, a co-sponsor of the legislation, pointed out the proposal will shift rather than raise taxes. Lawmakers said they would like to see the bill approved over the next two weeks in conjunction with the state’s new budget. Otherwise, they said it will become standalone legislation that would likely be considered after the November general election. Here’s how the legislation would provide an additional $282 million for six dozen public transit agencies without raising taxes: - 1.22 percent of the state sales tax revenue is already earmarked for public transit but capped at $75 million a year. Removing the cap, 1.22 percent would generate about $95 million, an extra $20 million. - An additional 3.22 percent of state sales tax revenue would be earmarked for public transit, generating $262 million. - The Port Authority would receive 22.5 percent of the $282 million total, or an extra $63.4 million after the first full year. - The state would not be required to raise the sales tax because an improved economy has increased the amount of revenue, which, combined with other sources, may give the state a $500 million budget surplus this year. “It’s hard to overstate the importance of this legislation,” Skoutelas said. The Port Authority and other transit agencies have tried for years to gain approval of a dedicated, predictable source of funding. “I couldn’t think of a more joyful moment than when [the governor] sits and signs the legislation.” If that happens. State Rep. Frank Dermody, D-Oakmont, heads the Allegheny County delegation to the House. “I can’t speak for everyone, but I think we have at least 20 votes,” he said, among the delegation’s 18 Democrats and five Republicans. “There’s a significant number of supporters from Philadelphia, because they’d be a major recipient, and other parts of the states where transit affects people’s lives.” The Philadelphia-based Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, for example, faces a $70 million operating budget deficit. The Charleroi-based Mid-Mon Valley Transit Authority is holding hearings about service cuts, including runs to Pittsburgh, because of dwindling subsidies. “This [proposed legislation] would give all of us financial stability for the foreseeable future,” Skoutelas said. “It meets transit needs locally, and statewide it has some degree of predictability, and it has growth potential.” The bill gives flexibility to transit systems to use some of the funds for capital purposes, such as repairing light rail and busway bridges

Amtrak seeks aid for Boston-NYC spans; Warns condition of three bridges needs attention Boston Globe June 20, 2004 WASHINGTON — A portion of the Northeast rail corridor that carries thousands of passengers a day between Boston and New York is in danger of being severed, Amtrak says, because of the uncertain state of three New England bridges. If any of the bridges, all within 20 miles of New London, Conn., became impassable, rail transit along the corridor would be cut off, prompting the rail carrier to consider busing travelers to a waiting train on the other side of the waterway. Two regional Amtrak engineers said last week the threat is real. Amtrak engineers said there is no immediate safety risk for passengers passing over the century-old bridges, but Amtrak officials are saying the ailing infrastructure is the result of inadequate funding from Congress, drawing rebukes from some lawmakers. Representative Michael E. Capuano, who serves on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, criticized Amtrak for poor communication of its problems, saying he’s never heard the possibility that these three bridges could cause the breakup of the corridor. “If you’re telling me that those bridges could fail tomorrow, why haven’t they been up there [in Congress] pounding the tables?” the Somerville Democrat said. “Do they want these bridges to fail, somehow thinking that’s going to get our attention? That’s a hell of a way to do politics.” Two bridges at risk, spanning the Thames and Niantic rivers, open regularly for water traffic and the third bridge, over the Miamicock River, is a fixed structure spanning 80 feet that has shifted over decades of use. Amtrak estimates the cost for repairing all three to be more than $31 million, and no plan exists to deal with the impact of permanent bridge failure. The highest uncertainty lies with the future of the 1,375-foot-long Thames River Bridge, which Amtrak officials say could take a year or longer to replace in an emergency. “This bridge has the potential to seize up,” George Fitter, an assistant division engineer for Amtrak, said as he stood on the drawbridge Tuesday describing the mechanical issues involved in repairing it. “I don’t know what we would do if it fetched up and seized,” said Andy Pedro, an assistant division engineer for structures at Amtrak. “I don’t know how we would get it open.” Those questions leave Amtrak with a dilemma if operation of one of the movable bridges ceased: Find a way to force the bridge open and keep it there, preventing rail traffic from passing, or find a way to force the bridge closed, disrupting water traffic. The Coast Guard could require the Thames River Bridge, which last year carried 1.8 million Amtrak passengers, to remain open permanently for water traffic. The warnings are part of a new Amtrak strategy to draw attention to what it says are impediments to improving the nation’s rail service. Amtrak president David L. Gunn was coaxed out of retirement in 2002 to bring the rail service, which had plunged into economic crisis, back on track. Since then, Amtrak has changed the way it communicates with the public. Press releases describing bright days ahead have become scarcer, replaced with a more aggressive campaign to reverse what it insists is insufficient funding from Congress. Amtrak is highlighting the bridge problems as its case in point about the impact of at least a decade of deferred maintenance. Amtrak spokesman Dan Stessel, based in Washington, traveled by train last Tuesday with a reporter to underline the poor state of the three bridges. He said Amtrak is using the bridges as “the biggest, the best example” that tells “the story of why this is important to people.” The bridges join a problematic capital program that includes the replacement of 1920s-era cables feeding the electrified system. Backup cables have failed, leaving one functioning cable system. “The penalty for not doing it varies,” Gunn said. “The Thames Bridge — we can roll the dice and say it’s good for another two years. We can patch it for another two years. And maybe we’ll win. If we lose the bridge, the corridor’s broken. If we lose the cables in Penn Station, the entire Northeast Corridor is crippled.” The national rail carrier has requested $1.8 billion, including $100 million for repayment of a Transportation Department loan in 2002, for the fiscal year that begins in October. The Bush administration has suggested Congress allocate half as much, $900 million, a figure Stessel said would require Amtrak to shut down. Last year, Amtrak and the White House floated the same numbers, with Congress meeting the rail service at a sustainable $1.2 billion. Beginning in 1997, maintenance was deferred for five years, after the federal government put Amtrak on a path toward self-sufficiency. Federal subsidies gradually declined through 2002, when Amtrak was supposed to be profitable, forcing the rail carrier to borrow more from private sources. In 2002, New York’s Penn Station was mortgaged for $300 million to make payroll. Amtrak says it needs these amounts to come up to speed: — $3.8 billion for infrastructure, $1.1 billion for fleet maintenance, and $900 million for stations and facilities. Amtrak’s inspector general estimates the rail carrier will need as much as $1.8 billion over the next five years to stabilize the system and upgrade tracks, bridges, and tunnels in the Northeast Corridor. “You can’t nickel-and-dime them to death,” said Representative James P. McGovern, Democrat of Worcester. “We really can’t be having this fight every single year.”

Bush is blasted on transit Deseret Morning News (Salt Lake City June 20, 2004 Environmentalists are lashing out at a Bush administration plan to cut federal funding for mass transit projects. The Sierra Club released a national report this past week titled “Missing the Train” that highlights the Bush administration’s proposal to change the way it funds transit projects. The report points to an imbalance between road funding and mass transit, whereas roads receive $4 for every $1 spent on public transit. Last year, the Bush administration proposed, as part of its six-year transportation plan, a change to the ratio for federal matching transit funds. Currently, the federal-state funding match for all new transportation projects is that the federal government kicks in 80 percent of the cost with the local contribution at 20 percent. But the Bush administration wants to change that to force local governments to foot half the bill — a 50-50 split — when it comes to transit projects like light rail and commuter trains. Environmentalists are alarmed, saying it could derail hundreds of transit projects across the country. “This could really hurt us in Utah,” said Marc Heileson of the Sierra Club’s southwest regional office. “We have just taken on commuter rail, and five new TRAX lines are planned for Salt Lake County alone. Utahns overwhelmingly want TRAX servicing their communities, and the Bush administration is going the wrong way.” Utah Transit Authority officials say a reduction in mass transit funding is not necessarily a roadblock. “We’ve anticipated only receiving a 50-50 match. That is something we planned for in the commuter rail line,” said Justin Jones, spokesman for UTA. “When you look at the national trend you see a lot of agencies competing for Federal Transportation Administration dollars. That’s an ongoing trend.” While blasting the Bush administration for being short-sighted on transit funding, the report praises mass transit projects like Utah’s TRAX system as a success. According to recent data from UTA, the north-south TRAX line, which opened in 1999, had an average daily ridership this May of 27,522 people — doubling the projected ridership expectations. The University TRAX line has more than doubled expectations to the tune of 12,716 people on average taking transit daily. “New transit lines are greatly exceeding projected ridership in Dallas, Denver, Salt Lake City and elsewhere,” the report stated. “New Starts, the federal program that helps promising transit projects get off the ground, has a record backlog of more than 200 projects, reflecting the fact that more and more communities are embracing, and clamoring for, public transportation.” The report makes note of the positive effects of transit. The American Public Transportation Association has calculated that every tax dollar that is invested in public transit generates six or more dollars in economic return. “People want more transportation choices, less traffic, and clean air to breathe,” Heileson said. “Funding convenient regional transit systems is the way to make it happen.”

A few rules for riding the rails; Among them: No beverages, no smoking, no food allowed Pioneer Press June 20, 2004 Riding a train or subway is routine for some people who live in major cities. But for many in the Twin Cities, taking the Hiawatha Line will be their first chance to regularly ride the rails. Knowing some of the dos and don’ts will help. As Twin Cities riders adjust to using light rail to get from one place to another, Metro Transit officials want people to be mindful of a few rules and apply certain etiquette on trains. For example, if sipping coffee on the way to work is a daily ritual, plan on finishing the cup before the train arrives. It’s one of the items not allowed inside the trains. Along with the no-drinks policy is no smoking, no food, no shouting, and no music unless headphones are used, said Bob Gibbons, Metro Transit spokesman. Don’t think about hopping on light rail without paying for it. Fare inspectors will be placed randomly on trains to check for proof of payment. If caught, you could pay a $100 fine, Gibbons said. In the first days of service, there will be three to five Metro Transit employees at each station to answer questions and help newcomers learn how to buy a ticket or make sure no one walks on the tracks. Besides following the rules, being courteous can make a difference, especially during rush hour. For example, allow riders to get off a train before boarding and avoid crowding by the doors while riding on the train. Giving up your seat for the elderly or disabled is another considerate gesture, Gibbons said. It may not be intentional when boarding or standing in a crowded train, but shoving and pushing aren’t allowed and can be prevented if you think ahead. One way is to move toward the door as the train reaches your destination, which leaves an empty seat open for another passenger. Those not getting off at the next stop should shift away from the door as well. Each train has bike racks, luggage racks and four designated areas for passengers with wheelchairs. If there is room and the bike racks are full, a passenger with a bike is allowed to stand in the aisle with a bike. In case of an emergency, an intercom system is located on station platforms and inside trains so riders can contact rail operators for assistance.

Hiawatha rail: End of the line?; Future is uncertain for additional transit Pioneer Press June 20, 2004 Planners want the Hiawatha Line to be the steel-wheeled spine of a network of fast service routes that ease traffic congestion in the Twin Cities. But Hiawatha’s Minneapolis-to-Bloomington route could be the only one served by light rail rather than a rapid-transit busway � where buses act like trains, with fares paid before riders board and routes designed so the vehicles stream almost unimpeded between stations. Meanwhile, tight state budgets and political arguments favoring roads over public transportation could keep a broad system of commuter trains, light rail and busways from advancing beyond blueprints. Supporters say the network is needed as a relief valve for traffic that will only get heavier as the region’s population grows. Opponents argue the effect on congestion is not big enough to justify huge price tags of construction and costly operating budgets in the future. The 12-mile Hiawatha Line came in at about $715 million. While individual projects are advancing, Metropolitan Council Chairman Peter Bell says the fate of the overall system may depend on two things: whether increasing congestion troubles “focus the mind” of the public enough to make it a priority � and whether Hiawatha is judged a success. A CENTRAL LINE The Twin Cities’ second light rail line could be an 11-mile route between Hiawatha’s Metrodome station, the University of Minnesota, the Midway neighborhood, state Capitol and downtown St. Paul. A decision on whether to build it is years away. Right now, a local committee is deciding whether to recommend light rail or a busway for further study along the Central Corridor, with a choice expected by year’s end. A light rail line would cost an estimated $840 million, said Steve Morris, project manager for the Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority. It would be an estimated $241 million to build the busway. The big cost difference is because the rail line would require a tunnel near the university, Morris said. But cost alone may not carry the day, he said; a busway may be too limited because there are only so many lanes of traffic near the busy university, forcing buses back into traffic. The decision on which option to study will set in motion months, perhaps years, of engineering studies that would be the underpinning of the project, if it gets a green light from the Met Council and state officials. BUSWAYS TO THE SOUTH, NORTHWEST Plans also are under way to connect busways to both ends of Hiawatha � running from downtown Minneapolis northwest to Rogers and south from the Mall of America into Dakota County, serving commuters in Eagan, Burnsville, Apple Valley and Lakeville. Dakota County planners are waiting for $10 million in state money to begin work on the Cedar Avenue busway. The five-year project’s total estimated cost is $119 million, said Gene Franchett, the county’s project manager. The initial money would go toward planning and some construction, such as converting highway shoulders into bus lanes, Franchett said. Planners once studied whether the Hiawatha rail line should be extended south but decided against the idea, in part because of the cost: $500 million, largely due to the need for a new bridge to carry trains over the Minnesota River, Franchett said. And $20 million is needed to get the 22-mile Northwest busway moving. The funds would allow work to start on park-and-ride lots and road changes on what would be an estimated $150 million project. The Northstar commuter rail line, planned to carry commuters up to 40 miles from Minneapolis to Big Lake, near St. Cloud, shares legislative limbo with the busways, which also include several other bus-oriented routes, such as the Riverview Corridor in St. Paul. Northstar needs $37.5 million from the state to ensure a federal commitment to the project. POLITICAL DEBATE David Strom, president of the Taxpayers League of Minnesota, contends there are more cost-effective ways to help more people get around than new transit corridors. Fixing a dozen bottlenecks on metro highways and spending more to quickly clear crashes that snarl traffic would do far more to reduce overall congestion than adding transit choices. “The question is, Why should everyone else be paying for your benefit, which, in the grand scheme of things, is very great for you and very low for the rest of the community?” he asked. Bell said the fight over transportation shouldn’t be framed as roads vs. buses or trains; a good transportation system, he argued, needs both. The high price tag of transit projects can be a difficult sell, Bell said, since no one claims they will make congestion disappear, only keep it from growing worse. “That’s a hard concept to convey,” Bell said. “It is really to provide commuters (with) choice.”

Light rail of yesteryear Pioneer Press June 20, 2004 The Twin Cities enjoyed a model streetcar system in the early 20th century, but shady business dealings and the ascendancy of the automobile spelled its doom. Picture a streetcar line extending from Stillwater to Lake Minnetonka, a distance of nearly 50 miles. Picture a metropolitan electric rail system with some 500 miles of track and more than 800 cars, carrying 165 million passengers a year along nearly every major street in two cities. It existed in the Twin Cities during much of the first half of the 20th century. It ceased to exist almost exactly 50 years ago and it’s a popular notion that a bunch of flimflam artists and gangsters put it out of business while taking the public for a ride. The truth, however, is a little more complex. “I remember my mother grabbing my hand while we rushed to the streetcar, sometimes pulling so hard that only my toes touched the ground,” said Keith Lindberg, 80, a retired electrician from South St. Paul. As a child, Lindberg lived in St. Paul’s Merriam Park neighborhood. “The line we rode was called the ‘Merri Mississippi’ because of the streets it traversed,” he remembered. “We’d take the Merri Mississippi downtown and come back on the St. Clair-Payne line, using a transfer. That way, we saved a 7-cent fare � which could buy a few Popsicles in those days.” Phil Settergren, 72, a retired third-generation hardware-store owner from Burnsville, remembers when streetcar fares were part of his student tuition at the University of Minnesota. His family lived near 42nd Street in South Minneapolis, where he could hop a streetcar and go downtown. There he would transfer to the “Intercampus Express,” a line affiliated with the university, for a free ride to the St. Paul campus. “You would pick up speed going down a long hill on Como Avenue near the university golf course and then make a right-angle turn on Eustis (Street), Settergren recalls. “There was always that fear that maybe we wouldn’t make that turn. But we always did.” THE LINES TOM LOWRY BUILT A network of privately owned streetcars, including some pulled by horses and a few powered by steam or cable, existed in Minneapolis and St. Paul in the last decades of the 19th century. It was then that Thomas Lowry acquired the rail systems in both cities and created the Twin City Rapid Transit Co., which he ran until his death in 1909. “Lowry always thought of the Twin Cities as a single metropolitan area,” said Russ Olson, whose 1976 book, “Electric Railways of Minnesota,” is the definitive source for local streetcar enthusiasts. Under Lowry and those who followed him, streetcar lines became part of the development fabric of the metropolitan region, encouraging the building of low-density housing in city neighborhoods and enabling communities like White Bear Lake, Stillwater, Bayport (it was called “South Stillwater” then) and the communities between Minneapolis and Lake Minnetonka to become true commuter suburbs. To create destinations in its far-flung communities, the streetcar company built big amusement parks in White Bear Lake (Wildwood Park) and on Lake Minnetonka (Big Island Park) and established a steamboat operation on Lake Minnetonka that was used by commuters and summer residents. SIX RIDES FOR 45 CENTS For 50 years, the majority of streetcars were quaint by modern standards: made of wood over steel frames. Fares were always cheap. In 1929, for example, the fare was 10 cents in cash or a frequent user could pay 45 cents for six tokens, each good for a ride. The wooden streetcars, which changed little after 1905, were rated at a top speed of 42 mph in a 1937 report, Olson said. By then, the transit company had launched a program to gradually replace them with larger, faster, all-steel streetcars. The transition was delayed by World War II, however, and the new cars, 142 of them, were not introduced until 1946. Dubbed “PCC cars” � for Presidents Conference Committee � the cars were 46 feet long (compared to a 40-foot bus) and more than 9 feet wide. At that time, however, the streetcar system of the Twin Cities was in decline and, some say, ripe for plunder. “It had huge operating expenses and, in addition, a physical plant that was coming to the end of its life and needed a huge investment,” said Aaron Isaacs, a Metro Transit planner and streetcar enthusiast. In Minneapolis, the streetcar company also had to plow the streets where streetcars operated. And in both cities, the maintenance of rails and overhead power lines were responsibilities of the company. “In reality, they didn’t have much freedom to control prices and they also had lots of expenses,” Isaacs said. GONE IN FIVE YEARS Enter Charles Green, a Wall Street speculator who acquired control of the streetcar company in 1949. Once in power he ended the upgrade programs, fired 800 employees, shut down less profitable lines and cut maintenance. His measures were so drastic � and his attitude so belligerent and obnoxious, according to local newspaper accounts � that he was ousted the following year. Green’s banishment came after a series of investigations, including one that was launched after it was revealed that local gangster Isadore Blumenfeld, a.k.a. Kid Cann, owned $172,000 in company stock. The man Green had hired for legal advice, Fred A. Ossanna, took over the business and promptly began shutting it down. Wooden streetcars were burned to recover the steel frames for scrap, while the steel cars were sold to other cities in the United States and Mexico. The conversion of Twin Cities mass transit from streetcar to buses swerved into pillage. Ultimately, Ossanna and some others involved in dismantling the system went to prison after it was learned they were getting kickbacks for selling recovered metal to a salvage company at below-market prices. But the departure of the streetcar system, officially shut down in the summer of 1954, was not treated entirely as an appalling scandal. “It was a great system, the most energy-efficient form of transportation,” Olson said. “Even though there was always a Minneapolis and a St. Paul, the streetcar linked these communities together. And something was lost when it went away.”

Getting Around: Trolley museum worth both the trip and the support June 20, 2004 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Washington Junction on the Port Authority’s light-rail line owes its name to history. That’s where the old Pittsburgh Interurban streetcar tracks split into a Y with the main route continuing to Washington, Pa., until service ended in 1953. Fresh bread, ice cream and other goods made in Pittsburgh were delivered nightly to scores of communities outside the city by Fast Freight Trolley Service on tracks that spread north, south, east and west of Downtown. You don’t have to travel to New Orleans to see the authentic Streetcar Named Desire or to walk through the trolley that appeared on “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood.” And you can still ride vintage, restored streetcars such as Car 14, discarded by Philadelphia Suburban Transportation but meticulously restored over the past six years by more than two dozen train enthusiasts, retired technicians and engineers who volunteered more than 12,000 hours of time. Those are but a small sample of things a visitor learns, sees and does at the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum, one of the nation’s largest, which is off Interstate 79 in Washington County, an easy 25-mile drive from Pittsburgh. I visited the facility last week. If this sounds as if I was impressed, I was. A half-century has passed since three well-worn trolleys limped to the site where Washington County once ran a “poor house” for indigent men. The trolleys were left in the middle of nowhere, and the old tracks were ripped up behind them. Today, the museum boasts 45 rail vehicles, two miles of track, 30 acres, restoration building, trolley display building, education center, generous benefactors and more than 100 volunteers. If you think the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum is only for train buffs, old-timers or a transportation writer with nothing better to do, you’re wrong. It is fascinating to experience how most people got around not very long ago. You realize, maybe dread, what the nation forsook for cars, trucks, $2 a gallon gas and interstate highways. Furthermore, if this reads like a “plug,” it is. The 21,000 people who visited the museum last year were hardly enough to pay the electric bill, let alone buy TV and billboard advertising for next weekend’s 50th anniversary, a milestone deserving of public recognition. At 11 a.m. Saturday as part of the celebration, the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum will roll out Car 14, awash in 20 gallons of new paint, looking as good and running as well as it did in 1949, when it was built. At 11:45 a.m., members will dedicate the McClane Loop, where streetcars will now be able to turn around and go back the way they came. That project is a story in itself. It was built from old rails, signals and other equipment salvaged by volunteers over a two-year period from the Overbrook line that the Port Authority abandoned in 1993. A Chartiers business, Fife Moving & Storage, hauled track to Philadelphia, where the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority had the special equipment to bend it into curved rail. The museum group, which has to beg, borrow and work for free, has 15 other businesses and agencies on its “thank you” list for the McClane Loop, plus 16 volunteers who came from rail museums in Baltimore and Illinois to help put the pieces together in March. I can’t imagine how the group will raise $6.75 million for its next dream: a 37,000-square-foot visitors center to create “a premier trolley museum unlike any other in the United States.” Then again, who would have believed it would raise $2 million for a 28,000-square-foot Trolley Display Building, opening soon? “Rather than throwing things in the scrap pile, the Port Authority and SEPTA give them to us to support their transit heritage,” said Scott Becker, whom the nonprofit group hired away from a trolley museum in Connecticut a decade ago to become full-time director of the Pennsylvania Trolley Museum, which used to be known as the Arden Trolley Museum. “Elected officials, the community, businesses who provide materials and services … they’ve all been just wonderful.” Obviously. Japanese TV and people from Australia, Germany and China have visited the museum at the Meadowlands. It’s your turn to look at the old photos and other archives. To hear the clang of the trolley bell and clatter of steel wheels over steel rails. To climb aboard for a ride into the past. And to preserve an earlier mode of travel for future generations. Hours are 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. weekdays through Labor Day, and 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekends through December. Admission prices: $6 for adults, $5 for seniors over 65, $3.50 for children 2 to 15, and free for younger children. In conjunction with the Car 14 and McClane Loop ceremonies, vintage cars and trucks will be featured as part of a “Cruizin’ with Trolleys” promotion Saturday and next Sunday. Parking is always free and a picnic area is available.

Price tag still a matter of debate; Critics say officials were blind to costs Pioneer Press June 20, 2004 The $715.3 million Hiawatha Line would never have hit the tracks if lawmakers at many levels hadn’t figured out how to pay for its construction. But critics continue to insist that funding for construction spiraled out of control. In 1998, the Hiawatha Line was estimated to cost $400 million, while the final price tag is almost twice as much. “I don’t want to suggest that everyone involved was driven by malice or anything else,” said David Strom, president of the Taxpayers League of Minnesota. “But I think among a lot of policy-makers there was a commitment to the project regardless of the costs.” Advocates of the Hiawatha Line say that the region’s transportation system needed the investment to stay competitive with other metropolitan areas. The costs went up, they say, because of inflation and after major changes, such as redesigning the Mall of America segment to allow direct access to the shopping center and extending the line several blocks to the Warehouse District in Minneapolis. Construction of the region’s first light rail line is paid for by a mix of federal, state, county and local contributions. But getting the federal and state chunks of the money was critical. Peter McLaughlin, a Hennepin County commissioner, said the $334.3 million in federal money would have gone to another state for rail projects had Minnesota not lobbied for the funds. Support by key Minnesota lawmakers in Congress, U.S. Rep. Martin Sabo, D-Minneapolis, and Rep. Jim Oberstar, D-Chisholm, helped the state acquire the federal funds that are the project’s “fundamental building block,” McLaughlin said. That federal backing for the project gave McLaughlin and other light rail advocates the muscle to keep pushing for LRT. “People were tired of debating this. They were tired of the light rail debate,” McLaughlin said. “They thought I was a nut case.” Once the federal government committed to kicking in a significant portion of the project’s funding, the next step was to get the state on board. That had been no easy task previously. But then-Gov. Arne Carlson agreed to provide the first state portion of $40 million in the Legislature’s 1998 bonding bill. Another crucial battle was won when then-Gov. Jesse Ventura later approved another $60 million in bonding to round out the state’s share at $100 million. But the battles to cover the costs of the Hiawatha Line are far from over. The $16.5 million annual operating costs are covered through the middle of next year. Then, the Legislature and Hennepin County Board will debate how to pay for line’s future operations. So far, the state and the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority pay 24 percent each for operating costs. Other costs of operations come from a federal Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Grant that totals 18 percent as well as 34 percent from expected fare revenue. Rail operations don’t pay for themselves through fare revenues alone in most places. The same is true for bus service. Metro Transit’s Bob Gibbons said discussions on subsidizing the Hiawatha Line are sure to continue well into the future. “State appropriation is always a mystery every two years,” he said. ANNUAL COSTS Projected for 2005 operations $16.5 million REVENUE SOURCES: Fares $5.6 million State General Fund $3.9 million Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority $3.9 million Federal Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Grant $3.1 million COST EXAMPLES All 17 stations $79 million Rail Operations and Maintenance Center $24 million One light rail car $3 million One ticket vending machine $82,000 FUNDING SOURCES Construction total $715.3 million Federal $334.3 million State of Minnesota $100 million Metropolitan Airports Commission $87 million Hennepin County $84.2 million Federal Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Grant $49.8 million Transit Capital Grant $39.9 million Minnesota Department of Transportation $20.1 million

Could new plan lead us in wrong direction? Houston Chronicle June 20, 2004 ARE we in Houston about to make a monumental blunder? Through the new 2025 Regional Transportation Plan, we are about to bet our long- term mobility future on a stupefying increase in new road capacity, at a time when physical, economic and demographic dynamics could leave us isolated in a sea of unnecessary concrete. Consider these three things: - People are getting older. - Immigrants, who are coming to Houston by the millions, have different experiences and interests from most of us who live here now. - Global oil production will soon peak, and prices will begin a long climb that will drive up the cost of everything. We live longer and baby boomers are reaching senior status and losing interest in mowing yards, maintenance of the family house and long drives to everything. Many seniors simply want easier access to movies and theater and ballgames and opera. As driving becomes difficult, whether because of poor eyesight or other disability, it becomes a problem to get to the grocery store, the drug store, the doctor’s office. Government and nonprofit agencies have a tough time dealing with the desperation of the elderly today, but soon the number of older people in Harris County alone will grow by 275 percent. They will have totally different needs from those of the less-than-25-percent of households with children that drive nearly all our public infrastructure decisions today. While those of us who are here now get older, those we project will soon come 3.6 million of them will be almost entirely foreign immigrants, mostly from urban Mexico, mostly without driving experience or licenses. The Latino population in Harris will triple, Anglo population will decline by 50 percent, black population will level out and Asians will continue their significant growth while remaining fewer in absolute number than blacks. Latinos and blacks show a marked preference for urban life, not suburban life, and Asians express interest in convenient, pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods. The Latino population in particular will be mostly clustered around family and friends in urban areas, and mostly dependent on transit, bikes and walking to get around. On top of this very large change in demographics, comes the top of the oil production curve, which will soon begin to flatten and eventually decline. Speculation about this is whether it will be two years or maybe 15 years, or 20. It appears Houston will enjoy fabulous salad years as refining heats up and the knowledge about squeezing more out of less becomes more important. But a point is reached at which the cost of gas and oil is so high that it makes sense to be more efficient. We might still find new ways to propel our personal vehicles at reasonable cost, but the costs of production and transportation of goods will make many things seem ridiculous to bring in, like lettuce from Mexico or California, when we can grow that right here. If the 2025 Regional Transportation Plan � which gives 73 percent of money for all new transportation capacity to roads � goes forward, it will be completed just about the time all these dynamics peak. Is it wise policy to increase Houston’s roadways by 60 percent, increase the roadway over public transportation balance significantly and embark on a course of car-based mobility spending that is unprecedented in American history in order to respond to our coming population growth, which is not certain in any event, and which is likely to be increasingly transit-dependent, inclined toward walkable, accessible urbanity, and is likely to be increasingly constrained from burning valuable chemical resources, thus driving up the price of travel, food, production and a thousand other things? On June 25, the Transportation Policy Council of the Houston-Galveston Area Council, led by Harris County Judge Robert Eckels, will likely vote for the Regional Transportation Plan. Will this road-based plan � which is extremely different from the direction nearly all other metropolitan regions in the United States are taking � be a bold and innovative path to the future, or a monumental blunder?

Toll road spat generating funny numbers Austin American-Statesman June 20, 2004 With Central Texas transportation leaders closing in on a momentous July 12 decision about a $2.2 billion toll road plan, something of a public relations war has broken out; “grass roots” advocacy groups are springing up to fire statistics at one another. And you know what they say about war and truth. Anyway, some of those numbers deserve a closer look. People for Efficient Transportation, a Circle C-based group opposing the toll road proposal, ran a huge ad in the Statesman about a week ago that said, “$4.5 billion or more tax dollars will be diverted from the Texas general revenue fund and deposited into the Texas mobility fund.” That’s a little bit true but mostly not. The Texas Mobility Fund will be a $3 billion stash of borrowed money once the Texas Transportation Commission gets around to borrowing it. That debt will be paid back over 20 years or so with $250 million to $350 million of state revenue annually. Most of the fund will go to toll roads. For now, that payback money is coming from traffic fines created by the Legislature last year. But starting in September 2005, those fines will instead go to the state’s general fund. Existing driver’s license and vehicle inspection fees will then go to the mobility fund. Those fees amount to about $230 million a year, or $4.6 billion over 20 years. Thus the charge by the Circle C folks. But that ignores the new fines going into the general fund, in theory replacing the lost fee revenue. The fines could fall short or raise more for the general fund. We don’t know yet. Citizens for Mobility, an arm of the road-centric Capital Area Transportation Coalition, has likewise put out some questionable numbers. That group has said that only 40 percent of the gas tax in Texas “goes to build and maintain roads.” Not so. Texas has a gas tax of 20 cents a gallon, which brought in $2.89 billion in fiscal 2003. Five percent goes to administration, and a quarter of the remainder, or about 24 percent, goes to public education. That leaves 71 percent, or $2.06 billion in 2003. James Bass, the Texas Department of Transportation finance director, said another $409 million at most went to other agency expenses, leaving $1.65 billion for building and maintaining roads. That’s 57 percent, not 40 percent. At minimum. Citizens for Mobility also has said the gasoline tax would have to go up $2 to $3 a gallon to “solve our problems.” Whoa! According to Bass, the Transportation Department nets about $105 million a year for each penny of gasoline tax. A $2 increase would raise a staggering $21 billion a year. A $3 increase would net $31.5 billion. The department’s annual budget is a mere $5.2 billion. A 1997 state study suggested that $11.8 billion a year would meet all the state’s transportation needs, a figure that would require “only” 63 cents a gallon more. Now, an increase of that size would surely dampen demand. And hybrid cars will use less gasoline if they catch on. So something above a 63 cent increase would be necessary to meet this “optimum” need. But $2 or $3 a gallon? No way.

Streetcars get close look Wisconsin State Journal June 21, 2004 They look cool. They’re fun to ride. More importantly, streetcars can inspire development and revitalize neighborhoods, Madison Mayor Dave Cieslewicz and business leaders said after checking out the nation’s premier trolley system in Portland, Ore. It’s time, in fact, for a major community discussion on whether streetcars should be part of the city’s future, Cieslewicz and others said. “It’s not just about transportation,” the mayor said. “It’s about building a city.” Those among the 18-person group, which toured Portland’s streetcar and light-rail commuter train system late last week, were impressed by the quality of service and the volume of housing and retail development along the rail lines. A streetcar usually runs on electricity on tracks on streets, while faster commuter trains run on their own tracks. The big question is whether Madison can afford them and if the investment is worth it. “I don’t view it as nutty or wacky. It’s intriguing,” said Mark Bugher, director of UW Research Park and chairman of the city’s Economic Development Commission. “I think clearly we have to have a public dialogue on whether or not this is what we want to do.” The 2.4-mile Portland Streetcar, which opened in July 2001, had 1,3665,000 riders its first year, 150,000 over estimates, and 1,623,000 in its second year, Portland data shows. The system cost $57 million, about half coming from municipal parking bonds. It costs about $2.4 million to operate annually, and it connects to a 44-mile light-rail system. The streetcar helped transform a dead warehouse area into a vibrant Downtown neighborhood of homes and shops, Cieslewicz said. Madison Metro General Manager Catherine Debo found the system “fascinating,” especially the integration of buses, streetcars and commuter trains and the development along rail corridors. Any system, Cieslewicz and Debo said, would depend heavily on interest and enthusiasm of the private sector. Hannah Gray, who will be a sophomore at UW-Madison in the fall, said she would use streetcars. “I just like public transportation because it’s nice and cheap and easy,” she said. Gray bikes most places she needs to go and said she would like the safety a streetcar would offer. “I see my life flash before my eyes several times a day,” she said. Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Jennifer Alexander said she was impressed with the “hand-in-hand” relationship between transportation and land use in Portland. But in Madison, “the truth will be in the details,” she said. The city and Dane County have been studying transit options for years. In 2002, a joint city, county and state Transport 2020 Committee recommended a startup project with expanded Metro bus service, a commuter light-rail train between Middleton and East Towne, and new park-and-ride lots. That effort would cost about $242 million for construction and equipment, with annual operating costs of $40 million, including existing Metro expenses. A follow-up 2020 task force is now debating what options should be considered in a $3 million-plus study by a private consultant necessary to get federal financial support. Melanie Black, who works at Insignia on State Street said a streetcar system would bring shoppers from the Capitol to the university end of State Street and vice-versa. Cieslewicz, who served on Transport 2020, wants a harder look at streetcars and intends to host Portland transit officials for public meetings here in the fall and to offer a vision for a system to capture the public’s imagination.

Washington Group-Led Joint Venture Wins $600.4 Million Contract to Design and Build Six-Mile-Long Light Rail Extension in Los Angeles Business Wire June 21, 2004 Washington Group International announced today that a company-led joint venture has been awarded a $600.4 million contract to design and build a six-mile-long extension to the Metro Gold Line light rail system in Los Angeles. The contract was awarded by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) to Eastside LRT Constructors, a joint venture of Washington Group (sponsor and 50 percent participant), Obayashi Inc. (35 percent), and Shimmick Construction Co. (15 percent). Construction will begin in early August and the project is scheduled for completion in 2009. The new line — named the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension — will run from Union Station in downtown Los Angeles to Pomona Boulevard. “We are honored to be playing another important role in bringing the advantages of light rail transit to Southern California commuters,” said Stephen G. Hanks, President and Chief Executive Officer of Washington Group. “Our experience in building trackwork, stations, and maintenance facilities for the MTA dates back to the late 1980s, and we have assembled an outstanding team to meet the requirements of this new design-build contract.” Hanks said Washington Group was part of a joint-venture team that recently completed a design-build contract for a 13.7-mile-long segment of the Gold Line that runs from Union Station to Pasadena. Some four miles of the dual-line Eastside Extension will be constructed at ground level or on bridges or other structures and almost two miles in 21-foot-diameter twin tunnels. The project also includes two underground stations, six aboveground stations, and installation of the overhead catenary system, along with considerable excavation, and signaling and communications systems. Washington Group has been involved in construction of light-rail facilities in Los Angeles since 1988 when the Blue Line was constructed to connect Los Angeles with Long Beach. The company constructed the line’s main yard and shops, and five bridges. Later, Washington Group constructed 13 stations along the Blue Line and performed finishing work on the Pershing Square and Civic Center underground stations. The company also constructed trackwork on the Green Line. In San Diego, Washington Group serves as construction manager of the Mission Valley East Project, a 5.8-mile-long addition to the Metropolitan Transit System’s (MTS) San Diego Trolley network.

LIGHT RAIL’S OPENING DAYS; Selling light rail: More than a token effort? Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN) June 21, 2004 It’s popular in some circles to demand that government be run more like a business. If that were the case, Metro Transit might have an annual budget of $67 million to spend on promoting the new Hiawatha light-rail line, which begins service Saturday. Instead, Hiawatha’s first-year marketing budget is $1.1 million - “and we had to fight for that,” said Metro Transit spokesman Bob Gibbons. “Would we like more money? You betcha,” he said. “Welcome to public service.” Metro Transit actually is spending as much, or more, to promote light rail than some other cities. In Houston, the transit authority spent about $1 million to promote a new light-rail line that opened in January. In the Philadelphia region, the new South Jersey rail line has a first-year marketing budget of $750,000. Such outlays pale beside marketing spending in the private sector. For example, German automaker Porsche spent about $350 million to develop its new luxury SUV, the Cayenne. Porsche then spent $33 million in 2003 on U.S. advertising for the Cayenne in its first year of production. Using that spending ratio, the $715 million Hiawatha project would command a marketing budget of more than $67 million. One advantage Hiawatha does have is free press. Hundreds of light-rail stories, positive and negative, have run in the local media over the last few years, getting the word out at no cost to Metro Transit. “We have an advantage over a consumer product in that we don’t need to create an awareness of light rail,” Gibbons said. “With consumer products, the only way you can create buzz is to spend a lot of money. “Whether you love it or hate it, I think there are very few people who are not aware of light rail.” Marketing efforts for Hiawatha are heavily geared to the grand opening this weekend. Metro Transit produced more than 830,000 promotional inserts that will run in the Star Tribune, the Pioneer Press, City Pages, the Skyway News and other local publications. A direct-mail piece went to every household within a quarter mile of either side of the rail line, inviting south Minneapolis residents to take advantage of free rides on opening day. Metro Transit also has been sending promotional videos and speakers to schools, clubs and civic groups - “wherever two or more people are gathered,” Gibbons joked. Local marketing experts suggested that promoters of the Hiawatha Line need to think big. “It’s so much more than a mode of transportation,” said marketing consultant Dick Lynch, a former executive with the Minneapolis ad agency Campbell Mithun. “I would argue that it represents a whole different way of life for an urban community. Instead of marketing it as a transportation alternative, you can market it as much, much more.” Lynch said the rail line “absolutely” should seek partnerships with downtown businesses, developers and others that could benefit from the project. “The thought of having a condo development from which you can step outside onto light rail - that is a huge added value,” he said. “So why wouldn’t you be marketing to these big developers?” Metro Transit has agreements with the Minnesota Twins and Timberwolves, Gibbons said. The Twins give transit some free scoreboard ads and mention the service on radio and TV broadcasts. Talks are underway for joint marketing efforts with the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and the Mall of America. Rail service to those destinations will begin in December. Private entities in some other cities are doing more for light rail. In Denver, three of the major sports teams paid a total of $1.2 million to build a rail spur serving the city’s downtown stadium district. Denver-area businesses are spending millions of dollars to fund a pro-rail marketing campaign in anticipation of a November vote on increasing the seven-county sales tax to pay for expanded rail service. “The real estate community is very supportive of this,” said Maria Garcia Berry, chairwoman of FasTracks Yes!, the group organizing the pro-rail campaign. “Every single mayor in the metro area is supporting us, along with every major chamber of commerce and business group.” Berry said she expects to have a budget of $3.5 million, about two-thirds of which will be spent on television ads. Metro Transit has no plans for TV ads, and its budget is unlikely to ever support widespread TV advertising. That may be a barrier to reaching people who need extra persuasion to try light rail, said Catrina McAuliffe, a senior partner and director of brand planning at Minneapolis ad agency Carmichael Lynch. She characterized Metro Transit’s efforts as “the old thing of ‘Tell them and they will come,’ rather than properly marketing it.” “With light rail, not everybody is going to be attracted to it,” McAuliffe said. “Some will come; others will sit at the margins and see what’s happening. Those people need an argument made to them about why they should come. It’s the people on the margins whom you need to reach.” Metro Transit’s Gibbons said the agency is doing the best it can with the dollars it has. “The budget we have is huge compared to other budgets we have to do other marketing things for public transportation,” he said. “We’re delighted to have this money, and we think we can spend it wisely.” PROMOTION BUDGETS $1.1 million: What Metro Transit spent marketing the $715 million Hiawatha Line $1 million: What Houston spent marketing the $324 million Reliant Astrodome Line $750,000: What Philadelphia spent marketing the $1.1 billion South Jersey Line $33 million: What Porsche spent advertising the Cayenne SUV, which cost $350 million to develop

Students get charter train for field trip; NJ Transit adds service to take kids to aquarium Camden Courier-Post June 21, 2004 There are no express trains on the River Line, and 15-minute service is just debuting today. But early this month, South Jersey’s light rail line had both - briefly - when NJ Transit added a special train to its schedule to transport 240 students from the New Albany School here to the New Jersey State Aquarium in Camden. “We realized we couldn’t accommodate such a large group,” said Janet Hines, a spokeswoman for NJ Transit, “so we had another train leave behind a regular train.” It may be the only time NJ Transit has run a charter train, the usual procedure being to add another car or two to regular service if necessary. It definitely was a first for the River Line. The agency has no policy on charter trains per se, but would not rule out a repeat performance, Hines said. “In the short term, if we do get large groups and cannot accommodate them, we will consider putting on another train,” she said. The students and faculty at the New Albany School say it is the way to go. “Absolutely fantastic” is the way Principal John Haag described the trip, which saw 240 second-graders and 77 adults transported from the Cinnaminson station to Camden’s aquarium stop “without a hitch.” And all for 45 cents a ticket (90 cents round-trip). Teacher Stephanie Furrer described the ride as “comfortable, smooth,” and “quiet enough to talk,” unlike some bus trips she can remember. Excursions have proven to be a bright spot for the River Line, which unlike most passenger rail lines, is carrying more casual riders than commuters. At last count, the 34-mile Camden-to-Trenton line - built at a cost of about $1 billion - was selling between 3,500 and 4,000 tickets on an average weekday, and 5,600 trips on a typical Saturday. NJ Transit officials say they hope that switching to 15-minute service during rush hour will boost the number of commuters. The original plan was to run trains every 15 minutes during the morning and evening rush, but since its opening in March the line has been running trains every half- hour at all times. The line operates from roughly 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., with some later service available on Saturday nights. Most runs consist of a single car capable of accommodating about 135 people, sitting and standing, Hines said. NJ Transit can add a second car - but no more - to increase capacity, she said. With 15-minute service, all trains will be single cars in the beginning, Hines said. The agency will monitor traffic to see when or if adding double-car runs make sense, she said. The double-car charter train earlier this month surprised more than one observer as it passed through stations without stopping. Inside the train, Harrison Ball, 8, was thoroughly enjoying himself. “Way much better than the bus,” the second-grader declared, adding that he particularly liked seeing the “steering wheel and other stuff” in the operator’s cab and the “box cars” and “big trains” in the rail yard the express passed. “Maybe I’ll even get a job” on the railroad, he said.

Congress urged to provide critical funding for security upgrades Metro June 22, 2004 In testimony before a House subcommittee, representatives of the transit and motorcoach industries urged Congress to fund upgrades in transportation security. Bill Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association, told members of the Highways, Transit and Pipelines Subcommittee of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee of a need for $6 billion in federal funding for critical security upgrades. “We do not need another wake-up call like Madrid,” Millar said. “What we need is significant federal funding from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to upgrade public transportation security.” Also testifying before the House subcommittee was Peter Pantuso, president/CEO of the American Bus Association (ABA). He also called for a significant federal investment in security upgrades. The security needs of ABA members, Pantuso said, include training for their personnel in threat assessment, threat recognition and crisis management. Equipment such as driver shields, emergency communication systems and surveillance cameras for bus facilities and garages are also necessary, he said.

Old trolley car back on track for daily runs; No. 85 kicks off service Monday Charlotte Observer June 22, 2004 In spring 1938, Charlotte’s trolley fleet was dismantled and the city’s last streetcar rolled out of uptown. On Monday, that very same streetcar makes a splashy and expensive return. After years of planning and restoration, and after millions of dollars fixing track and altering buildings, the city’s long-awaited daily trolley service kicks off at 11 a.m. when the historic No. 85 rolls north from Atherton Mill to Ninth Street. Earlier and more frequent pickups begin in mid-September after three new replica trolleys arrive. The old streetcar with its brass bell and dark green paint job has come a long way from the days when it was used as a diner. Or when volunteers ran it back and forth on a 100-yard track, powered by an extension cord. The daily trip will take the old car through a glass tunnel in the Charlotte Convention Center, past the future NBA arena and near uptown’s restaurants, theaters, museums, art galleries and library. “This is the coolest thing to ever happen to Charlotte,” said Gaines Brown, a longtime volunteer and former president of the nonprofit Charlotte Trolley Inc. Trolley supporters expect conventioneers and uptown workers to hop aboard for trips to lunches and dinners in the South End. Commuters may ride after 7 a.m. service starts in mid-September. And they hope those trips will spark interest in light-rail trains when they start running from Interstate 485 to uptown in late 2006. Historian Dan Morrill bought the trolley for $1,000 in 1987. But that was just the start. About $32 million has been spent on the tracks, trolley and convention center. That money came from Charlotte taxpayers, the convention center and Charlotte Area Transit System. Daily service was to have started last summer, but a series of problems — including a parking garage built a inch too high — delayed the project. Trolley critic Mike Castano, a former council member, says uptown does not have enough people to make the trolley worthwhile. “I don’t think they will get the ridership to justify the expense. Look at what taxpayers have already put into it.” Uptown developer Daniel Levine says the coming of the trolley, along with the arena and Johnson & Wales University, will further invigorate uptown. “I am not suggesting the trolley will move massive amounts of people, but it will carry many of our visitors and residents.” Morrill, the consulting director of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Historic Landmarks Commission, tracked the old trolley for several years before finding it in a weedy Huntersville lot. Years of restorations followed. Weekend service through South End began in 1996. “We are cheating death,” Morrill said of bringing the old car back uptown. Trolleys began service here in 1887 and helped start the city’s first suburbs of Dilworth, Elizabeth and Myers Park. The remains of the turn-of-the-century trolley barn also are being preserved for a museum and streetcar garage. CATS, which will operate the trolley, has spent $200,000 to add new wheels, brakes and electrical equipment to No. 85. “I don’t want people to think this is about transportation,” Morrill said. “This is about saving Charlotte’s history.”

New light rail to make debut in East San Jose; VTA BANKING ON LINE TO REVIVE RIDERSHIP, BOOST OTHER PROJECTS San Jose Mercury News June 22, 2004 On Wednesday, light rail finally will reach into East San Jose — and Clark Leyva can’t wait. The 50-year-old commuter says he will stop driving his pickup 15 miles to his job at Catalyst Semiconductor in Sunnyvale, and instead will hop aboard the train every day. It’s a change Leyva figures will save him $70 a month in gas costs, even after train fares are collected. ``That right there is more than enough to get excited about,’’ said Leyva, who lives two blocks from the train station on McKee Road and whose office is two-minute stroll from light-rail tracks. ``Plus, getting on and off right in front of where I work will be really nice.’’ Ridership has plummeted The Valley Transportation Authority hopes there are thousands more like Leyva. Whereas the agency once boasted that the new 6.3-mile extension past the Great Mall and onto Capitol Avenue would be its most popular route, transit officials now are more cautious. Ridership has plummeted over the past four years as 200,000 jobs in the valley disappeared. Now, no one is certain how many people will take advantage of the $435 million extension, even though the agency’s highest percentage of transit users live on the East Side. The new line will run from the Cisco Way station on Tasman Drive across Interstate 880 to Alum Rock Avenue in San Jose. It is opening on schedule and $14 million under budget. A ribbon-cutting ceremony is planned for 11:30 a.m. Wednesday, with free rides offered that day. Full, fare-paying service begins Thursday. And plenty of people, including critics, will be watching. The agency already runs one of the costliest trolley systems in the country, and the fate of this line could affect transit plans for decades. If riders return to the trolley, efforts to extend tracks elsewhere could speed up. If ridership stalls, those plans may also stall. ``You might have a lot of people going to the Great Mall shopping, and there are a lot of residences along this line,’’ said Jack Collins, VTA’s chief construction officer. ``But we’re not smart enough to know what ridership is going to be. We’ll just have to wait.’’ First extension since ‘99 It’s the first extension since 1999, when light rail opened from San Jose to Mountain View. That line is an example of how well light rail can work — and how quickly ridership can fall. At the height of the dot-com explosion, with the roads jammed, commuters flocked to the trolleys. Ridership reached more than 31,000 each weekday by Christmas of that year. Then came the recession. Ridership fell to 18,000 last December, with the Mountain View extension taking the biggest hit — dropping from 6,000 to 2,000 riders a day. ``That’s a huge drop,’’ Collins said. ``One would think if employment comes back, that ridership will come back. I really think it will, but it’s all a function of those offices filling up with techies.’’ Trains on the new line were supposed to run directly from East San Jose to Mountain View. But the change in ridership patterns means passengers now will transfer at the Baypointe Station on First Street to get a Mountain View-bound train. Trains from East San Jose instead will turn south toward downtown San Jose, where the transit agency says most riders are headed. That caused problems for a youth group last week waiting to take light rail from Milpitas to Great America in Santa Clara, a short segment of the new line that opened a year ago. When the group leader found out his kids would need to transfer trains to get to the amusement park, he sent them to a nearby bus stop instead, muttering that light-rail use ``was a hassle.’’ Others worry that if passengers are scarce, the annual $3.7 million cost of running trains will mean more cuts and costlier tickets. ``I have mixed feelings about light rail,’’ said Chris Lepe, South Bay coordinator with the Transportation and Land Use Coalition in Oakland, a group that advocates more bus service. The agency estimates that the new line will ferry 6,500 riders 10 years from now, perhaps more if the Bay Area Rapid Transit extension to San Jose is open by then. BART and light rail would meet at Montague Expressway. Studies have shown that light rail in Santa Clara County costs more and is among the slowest of any comparable system in the country. Still, millions are being invested in a line to Campbell that will open in 2006, and studies are under way to extend trains to Eastridge Shopping Center and down Capitol Expressway to Highway 87. Future lines could be scratched if riders don’t flock to the line about to open, making this a possible litmus test for light rail. Can ridership flourish in an area where so many people already ride county buses? No promises, said Collins. ``Other system have been built out over decades, 50 to 60 years,’’ Collins said. ``We still have a long way to go. The city needs to mature. Land-use changes take time to occur and there’s still very low density throughout the valley. ``When you compare San Jose to cities like Boston and Philadelphia, they have density that is a lot higher. That is where your ridership comes from - - people living close to transit. Come back in 40 years and then maybe we can write a story on what success there has been.’’

Mass transit’s next stop: Maybe Gloucester County Philadelphia Inquirer June 22, 2004 Camden County has had the PATCO High-Speed Line for 35 years. Light rail began running through Burlington County in March. Now officials on both sides of the Delaware River are considering two proposals to bring Gloucester County into the region’s mass-transit loop, linking the fast-growing county to Center City. One idea is to extend SEPTA’s Broad Street line south to the former Navy Base, and then across - or under - the Delaware River. The other proposal, further along and widely considered more realistic, would extend the High-Speed Line from Camden into the heart of Gloucester County. If either proposal pans out, Eagles fans could hop a train in Deptford to get to Lincoln Financial Field. Philadelphia students could have a direct line to Rowan University in Glassboro. Commuters could read a book instead of staring at the license plate ahead of them on their way to Center City. The goal is to get travelers out of their cars and away from the traffic jams radiating from the notorious interchange of Route 42 and Interstates 76 and 295 - the state’s ninth-most congested. “Getting into Gloucester County is an absolute necessity,” said New Jersey Transportation Commissioner Jack Lettiere, who is chairman of NJ Transit. “We all know we have to get there.” When and how that happens, though, is not clear. Both proposals are in the early stages, and both face obstacles. Similar plans have been considered before, but nothing ever materialized. Cost is high on the list of hurdles. The proposals’ backers say no one agency can afford what would be a more than $1 billion project, so cooperation among agencies is key. So, too, is proving need - and public support. That could be what separates a proposal from the dozen or so other transit ideas on the table for the greater Philadelphia area, such as the Schuylkill Valley Metro, and hundreds of others across the nation. Each is vying for dwindling federal transit dollars. In the past, the federal government has paid for up to 80 percent of new transit projects, with local agencies kicking in the other 20 percent. That formula is shifting to 50-50. “There are too many projects, too many good ideas,” said Donald Shanis, assistant executive director for transportation planning for the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, at a transit conference in Philadelphia last week. “We need to narrow them down. We know we can’t afford them all.” Shanis, whose agency plays a big part in the decision-making process, said extending the High-Speed Line into Gloucester County probably topped the list of projects in South Jersey. Many say the proposal to extend the Broad Street line into South Jersey would be too costly, especially if it involved building a tunnel under or a bridge over the Delaware River. The nearest bridge, the Walt Whitman, was not designed to carry the load of a mass-transit line, according to the Delaware River Port Authority, which operates the span. Its sister, the Ben Franklin Bridge, which carries the High-Speed Line, was. Philadelphia Councilman James Kenney, who introduced the proposal at a City Council meeting in May, said his main goal was to bring mass transit to the business park at the former Navy Base. “I figured while we’re doing it, while we have a hole in the ground, let’s maybe look at having a regional project that could potentially alleviate congestion in South Jersey,” he said. “Obviously, something like that is a huge undertaking, but as a region, we should think big.” Kenney said he was organizing hearings and meetings on the proposal. One meeting will be with officials at the port authority, which operates PATCO and is behind the plan to extend the High-Speed Line into Gloucester County. The bistate agency has spent $440,000 - and recently authorized an additional $180,000 - to study the South Jersey proposal and a new transit route to serve Philadelphia’s waterfront. That service, either a trolley or rail line, would connect to existing public transit in Center City and run along Columbus Boulevard’s median from Spring Garden Street to Pier 70 near Tasker Street. The line could be extended to the former Navy Base later on. Port authority officials have homed in on two alignments for the proposed South Jersey connection, based on meetings with local officials and reaction from four public hearings. Under one scenario, the High-Speed Line would be extended along existing railroad rights-of-way through town centers to Glassboro. Based on current travel patterns, STV Inc., the Philadelphia consultant leading the study, predicted that such a line might draw 21,000 to 31,000 fares a day - five to seven times the 4,200 daily boardings reported by the new Camden-to-Trenton light-rail line through Burlington County. Officials also are considering running the line down the median of Route 55. Early estimates suggest that the line could draw 17,000 to 27,000 fares a day. Both alignments would end at Glassboro, with the possibility of an extension to Millville in Cumberland County. State Sen. Stephen Sweeney (D., Gloucester), who heads the Gloucester County freeholder board, said he favored neither proposal. It would make a lot more sense, he said, to run a line down notoriously clogged Route 42 - and through the population centers of Gloucester, Washington, Monroe and Winslow Townships. “This is where the congestion is. This is where your population is,” Sweeney said. “It only makes sense to invest your dollar where the congestion is being created.” The chief executive officer of the port authority, John Matheussen, who has agreed to add Sweeney’s proposal to his agency’s study, said any new service into Gloucester County would be modeled on the High-Speed Line, which has no grade crossings and is elevated or depressed as it passes through towns. It is more costly than at-grade construction; preliminary estimates suggest the Route 55 alignment from Camden to Glassboro could cost up to $2.3 billion, while running the line along the rights-of-way could cost up to $2.7 billion. But officials said communities involved were concerned about safety issues at grade crossings. Such fears played a part in killing plans to bring light rail to Gloucester County in the 1990s. The service instead went to Burlington County. That River Line will end up costing state taxpayers $1.1 billion, with no help from the federal government. That’s in large part because transit officials could not justify a need for the service, now widely promoted as an economic-development project to revive the river towns than as a solution to a transportation problem. But there is a transportation need in Gloucester County, officials insisted, pointing to the traffic jams. “It might take quite an effort, quite a while to get this off the ground, but I think we’ll get there,” Lettiere said. “It has to happen.”

Nottingham: Tram enjoys best month Nottingham Evening Post 22 June 2004 Tram managers are confident they will know how many people have used the route in its first year - despite continuing problems with ticket machines. The Nottingham-to-Hucknall line logged 541,200 passengers in May, its best month since launching on March 9. But problems with conductors’ hand-held computer ticketing machines means many passengers are still not being recorded. And conductors still cannot use their machines to swipe electronic Easyrider cards which are used on buses and trams. Nottingham Express Transit said it expected about eight million passengers to use the tram in its first year. Pat Armstrong, NET project leader, said the ‘lost’ passengers meant the tram’s success was being under estimated. Head counts are being carried out this month to try to get a more accurate assessment. These will be repeated later in the year. “We’ll be reasonably confident of the figures at the end (of the year),” added Mr Armstrong. The tram’s performance was being discussed at a city council meeting this afternoon. Plans to build another line, from Nottingham to Beeston and Chilwell, were being debated at a separate meeting. The city council’s executive board is expected to approve plans which include a 1,400 space park-and-ride site in Toton. Later this year the city and county councils are expected to submit an application to the Government for permission to build the line.

Controversial streetcar plan clears hurdle The Toronto Star June 22, 2004 Having streetcars in their own lanes on St. Clair Ave. W. is one step closer to reality after city staff recommended yesterday an exclusive right-of-way for the TTC down the centre of the six-lane, 6.7-kilometre road. Promising that businesses would be better off, pedestrians safer, TTC service more reliable and the whole stretch between Yonge and Keele Sts. revitalized, city staff formally passed the political hot potato to city council - which will decide the matter in September. “This is a 25- to 30-year decision,” said Rod McPhail, director of transportation planning for the city. Over that period, “the way we get around is going to change,” McPhail said. “So what should we do? I think we have to improve transit and we can do it on St. Clair.” Since the street is 21 metres wide, McPhail said it’s a “no-brainer” to keep parking and give streetcars their own lane. “The taxpayers spend $3 million on each streetcar; you want it to operate efficiently. Should 40 people on it be stopped by one person in one car (turning left)?” he said. The city has met with more than 60 special-interest groups; held more than 30 public meetings to discuss nine proposed solutions to improving traffic on St. Clair; and published leaflets in English, Italian and Portuguese for the $30 million - $35 million project. The issue promises to get more divisive through the summer. “This has been an emotional project,” McPhail said. “There’s a divide in this community. You’re going to hear both sides. That’s the process. That’s what we do.” Public deputations will be heard Sept. 13 before a joint meeting of all city departments involved in the environmental assessment - including the TTC and works department - before the matter goes to city council later that month. Last night, at Timothy Eaton Memorial Church on St. Clair Ave. west of Avenue Rd., residents took a look at the recommended proposal. They were divided. “It’s a terrible idea,” said Paul Pernett, who’s worried about losing a lane of traffic. “There are alternatives. They can allow the streetcars to control the traffic lights.” Another resident, Tony Hunt, loved it. “For safety reasons alone, keeping cars off the streetcar tracks is the thing to do,” he said. The fighting will continue. There’s another public meeting tomorrow night at the Joe Piccinnini Centre, hosted by the city, preceded by a rally against the streetcar proposal at 6 p.m., hosted by opponents. Among those opposed are: - Business owners worried about lost parking spaces. - Residents worried about left-turn restrictions on side streets. - Cyclists upset at lack of bike lanes. - Those who fear an unattractive streetscape. “Give them a priority during rush hour and so forth, but don’t give them a 24-hour solution for a four-hour problem,” said Jeff Gillan, co-chair of the Corso Italia Business Improvement Association, which represents about 350 businesses opposed to streetcar-only lanes. There are advantages to the proposal. On the pro side: - Streetcar service will be faster and more reliable. - There will be more opportunities to turn left or make U-turns on to major roads. - About 570 of the 630 on-street parking spots will be kept and parking lots will be added. - Drivers will not be stuck behind streetcars, and traffic on residential streets will be lighter. “We’ve studied so many situations … after investments in transit, businesses only do better. It draws people from great distances because the environment is so much more inviting to visitors or shoppers,” said Mitch Stambler, manager of service planning for the TTC. Adding more streetcars won’t help, “if all they do is bump and grind in traffic congestion and wait behind (traffic accidents), it doesn’t matter if you have 20 streetcars on the line or 40, none of them are moving.” An alternative, which calls for a centre median and a left turn lane with streetcar tracks on either side, is still on display. City council must approve some kind of work, since St. Clair is due for repairs next year. Caught in the middle is Joe Mihevc, (Ward 21, St. Paul’s), the vice-chair of the TTC. “It’s a fluid, dynamic process. We have until September to work out these details.” Opposed, however, is Councillor Cesar Palacio (Ward 17, Davenport) and Tony Ruprecht, the MPP for Davenport. Palacio says 90 per cent of his community opposes the plan, which he says is bad for pedestrians and cyclists and will increase congestion on St. Clair. Mayor David Miller said more work needs to be done. “We’ll continue to find a balance between excellent transit and addressing local issues like parking for small business.”

Light rail debuts Saturday Minneapolis Star Tribune June 23, 2004 There is so much to take in: the look of the cars, the quality of the ride, the views of the city, the designs of the stations. When the Hiawatha light-rail line opens its doors for service Saturday, riders may not want to get off. But they might have to. Anticipating crowds for free rides on opening day, Metro Transit will empty the trains at the last stop on each end to clear seats for new passengers. Based on the experience of other cities, “the main issue with light-rail transit openings is the enthusiasm of citizens to ride the train,” said Bob Gibbons, Metro Transit’s director of customer services. “People tend to want to ride the same train car end to end at least once and often several times. This does not give people waiting at down-line stations a chance to ride.” A practice run. There’s no rule against leaving the train and getting right back in line for another trip. But if boarding lines are long, buses will offer free rides to all 12 stations so passengers can quickly return to their starting points. To help entice people to hop off the train, each station will be surrounded by celebrations: food, music, family entertainment and tours (of the Metrodome and Fort Snelling, among others), will run from noon to 6 p.m. Expanded entertainment is planned at each end of the line: Fort Snelling and the Warehouse District downtown. And an added bonus: Riders who get off the train and collect a “passport” stamp at six stations may enter a contest for prizes. Free train rides Saturday and Sunday are part of the light-rail marketing effort. It’s a “try it, you’ll like it” outreach to Twin Cities-area residents who now depend on their cars. “Light rail will speak for itself,” said Mark Fuhrmann, chief of staff for the rail project. “It is a high-quality, super-quiet, very comfortable ride. “It will be fun for those who rode the streetcars in the first half of the 20th century to compare their ride experience then with their ride experience now,” Fuhrmann said. “I expect that they will notice a dramatic change.” (The last streetcar served the Twin Cities 50 years ago to the month.) Opening day tips - The trains will start rolling after a send-off ceremony at 10 a.m. Saturday at the Warehouse District/Hennepin Avenue station in downtown Minneapolis. Gov. Tim Pawlenty will be among those who mark the moment. He and other dignitaries have been invited aboard the first two trains going south from the station. - For the public, train doors will open for boarding about 11 a.m. at the 12 stations along the opening segment. - Expect downtown to be busy. Besides rail festivities, the Twins are to play the Milwaukee Brewers at 6:10 p.m. at the Metrodome in a typically well-attended match-up. And current and former Twins players will host an autograph party in the plaza near the Downtown East-Metrodome light-rail station. - Safety rules will be strictly enforced: Pedestrians should cross tracks only at crosswalks. Motorists should heed traffic signals and no-turn restrictions near the tracks. - Corridors: Stand behind the yellow lines on station platforms until train stops. Keep arms and legs clear of doors.

Next Stop for the Subway, a Fully Automated Future New York Times June 23, 2004 The subway of the future was rumbling back and forth on the Canarsie line in Brooklyn the other day. Not sleek or silent, it seemed no different from any other train. But its innards set it apart, making it groundbreaking for a transit agency long dogged by a Luddite image. After several years of installation work and testing, New York City Transit is finally close to unveiling its first computer-controlled train line. A rollout of the $287 million system will begin in October and continue through next spring on an overhauled L line. At first, train operators will remain in control, but when the computer-based system becomes fully operational, probably sometime in May, trains will essentially drive themselves from station to station in fully automatic mode. The spacing of trains, their speeds and when they start and stop will be entirely controlled by a complicated system of onboard and remote computers that communicate with each other via radio signals. Operators will continue to ride in the front cab in case of emergency, but their only job will be to push a button in front of them periodically to alert the rail control center that they are paying attention. And if all goes according to plan, in a few decades hence, all New York City subway trains will run in the same way, without human help. “This is a revolution,” said Nabil N. Ghaly, chief signal engineer for the transit authority. Although the system’s benefits mainly center on being able to run more trains at higher speeds, the most important advancement will be in safety, supporters said. “The whole idea is to eliminate human error,” said Joe Bauer, a train operator instructor who has been helping test the new system. More than a decade ago, a subway train with a drunken motorman aboard barreled through a railroad switch in Union Square and derailed, killing five people and pushing transit officials to begin exploring options for automating their aging system. Automated trains are by no means new. In San Francisco, Bay Area Rapid Transit trains have been completely automated since the 1970’s. And New York City had a fully automated train between Grand Central and Times Square for two years in the early 1960’s. More recently, driverless, computer-controlled train lines have emerged in Paris, London, Vancouver, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and elsewhere. The New York City subway, however, continues to depend on the same antiquated system of signal lights, caution flags and speed limits. “We are seriously behind,” Mr. Ghaly said. The current system dates to the late 19th century. Tracks are divided into blocks, usually about 600 feet long, energized by an electrical current. When a train runs over a block, it interrupts the current and triggers a signal light behind it indicating that that section of track is occupied. Trains following behind will be stopped by a red light. The problem is, it is impossible to know where exactly the train is within a block of track, so it has to be assumed when coordinating traffic flow that the train is at the beginning of a block. If engineers want to run more trains through a stretch of track, more signals have to be installed, but this is possible only up to a certain point. Right now, the least amount of space between signals is about every 300 feet, except in special instances, like curves. Another drawback of the system is that if a signal is broken, which happens from time to time, the transit authority depends on train operators following guidelines that say they can travel no faster than 10 miles per hour. “When a signal fails, we are really depending on the rule book,” Mr. Ghaly said. If workers are doing track repairs, the transit authority also relies on train operators obeying flagmen and instructions to slow down. And the signal system only works in one direction. If a train needs to back up because of an emergency, all the trains behind it have to be cleared. In the new system, each train on a line will have two onboard computers (one is a backup) and an electronic reader strapped to its belly. The readers are designed to pick up signals from radio transponders placed every 600 feet along the tracks. The transponders will give trains the information they need to track their locations and speeds. Each onboard computer will in turn communicate by radio waves with computers set up in spots along the track. These track-side computers will be doing the main work of traffic regulation. The trains’ onboard computers will then set down proper speeds. Meanwhile, a main computer at the new rail control center, being built in Manhattan, will monitor everything and issue commands when needed. In October, the system will begin operating in “shadow” mode on the L line, with train operators still completely in control while engineers make sure the software is working properly. Later, over gradually lengthening segments, the computer system will begin issuing commands to the train operator about speed and travel distances, but the operator will still apply the throttle. If the train operator ignores directions from the computer console inside the cab, the computer system will take over and halt the train. Finally, in May or June of next year, the line will move to fully automatic mode, in which the train operator will simply sit back and watch while the train moves from station to station on its own. The new system will allow the transit authority to squeeze 20 percent more trains onto its tracks, running 30 to 31 trains per hour on a typical line instead of 26, and permit the trains to operate at higher speeds, meaning less waiting time and shorter rides for passengers. Stations will also have computer displays that will offer passengers real-time information about when the next train will arrive. But some outside the transit authority have raised questions about whether having computers control trains is safe in New York City, given the system’s age and complexity and all that can happen on the tracks. “No subway system is like New York City’s subway system,” said Councilman John C. Liu, chairman of the City Council’s Transportation Committee, who wants to hold hearings this fall on the system. “Before you start having robots run our subways, I’d like to see them get the P.A. system up and running,” he said. “Let’s get the P.A. system working on all the subway cars and platforms. Let’s get the lighting fixed on all the platforms. Let’s get the MetroCard machines working fully, all the time. Get the basic stuff done first before you go into this Buck Rogers mode.” Much controversy has centered on whether the transit authority will eliminate conductors on the new trains, leaving them with only one crew member, because train operators, who no longer have to worry about running their trains, can open and close the doors, which conductors now do. Transit officials say they are still evaluating. But union officials have been issuing warnings, saying that in a time of terrorism fears, more crew members are needed on trains, not less. They point out that packed trains in rush hours can have more than 2,500 passengers. In an emergency, one crew member, located at the front of the train, would have trouble. “It’s important to be at the technology curve, but it has to be sensible,” said Roger Toussaint, president of Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union. The questions about safety frustrate those close to the project, who point out that the technology has proven itself in other cities. The project is being led by Siemens Transportation Systems Inc., the company that brought Paris the driverless Meteor Metro line, which opened in 1998. Engineers concede, however, the New York’s system brings its own set of challenges. Stephane Bois, a software consultant on the project, said the biggest difficulty has been figuring out how to overlay the new system over the old, while making sure both still work. Despite the criticism and obstacles, transit officials are moving forward with plans to convert the No. 7 line beginning in 2007 to the same computer-based system and then the F line in Brooklyn in 2009. Eventually, transit officials hope the entire system will be converted, although that could take decades. As for the matter of making public address announcements actually understandable, they say they are still working on that.

FasTracks petitions chug to state office Rocky Mountain News June 23, 2004 A parade of volunteers hauled petitions containing nearly 63,000 signatures up the 16th Street Mall to the secretary of state’s office during Tuesday’s lunch hour. Their aim is to put a sales-tax hike that would help finance the $4.7 billion FasTracks package of transit projects on November’s ballot. “The next task is to win in November,” Mike Maus, one of the volunteers, told a rally of about 120 people on the plaza outside the state office. Inside, staff members will determine whether there are at least 34,593 valid signatures of registered voters from within the seven-county Regional Transportation District. Organizers are confident they will meet the threshold. They said their random checking showed 76 percent of the signatures were valid. The effort lasted 45 days and is one of very few large-scale initiatives to be done by an all-volunteer force of circulators since the state has allowed paid circulators. Former RTD chairman Mary Blue said she gathered 893 signatures herself. The volunteers, wearing campaign T-shirts, wheeled two wagons holding the 27 boxes of petitions up the mall from Union Station in a parade led by a drum corps. They politicked with passersby along the trek. “I really do feel that light rail will make a big difference in our community,” said Liz Rutledge, a Park Hill mother who worked on the petition drive. “Now the people need to learn the importance of this project.” “We found that practically all the people we approached were enthusiastic backers of the idea,” said Jon Esty, president of the Colorado Rail Passenger Association. “The only complaint we ran into was ‘Why wasn’t this done sooner?’ “

Parts of Baltimore Light rail to Reopen WJZ 13: Baltimore News June 23, 2004 The Maryland Transit Administration will resume operating Light Rail trains as far as North Linthicum at the end of this week. Light Rail service south of the Camden Yards stop has been closed since February 28 for work on the Double Track construction project. The second track will eliminate delays previously experienced at single-tracked sections because of the need to wait for oncoming trains. The project will also allow MTA crews improved access to the tracks to perform necessary or emergency maintenance. “Too many times in the past, riders have been delayed because their Light Rail train had to move off to the side to allow another train to pass on the same track,” said Maryland Transportation Secretary Robert L. Flanagan. “With a second track, we do not have that problem now and therefore do not have those unnecessary delays.” Service to Westport, Cherry Hill, Patapsco Avenue, Baltimore Highlands, Nursery Road and North Linthicum will begin June 27. The only stops that still remain closed include Ferndale, Cromwell Station, BWI Business Center and BWI Airport. They are scheduled to reopen this Fall. “Although this shutdown period has been an inconvenience to Light Rail riders, I know that our riders understand this project is necessary to improve Light Rail travel and safety,” said MTA Administrator Robert L. Smith. “By doing an extended shutdown like this, we are shaving about three months off the work schedule, and are able to reopen service to our riders earlier than if we did a series of smaller shutdowns. We appreciate their patience during this construction period.”

TROLLEY SERVICE RETURNS TO CHARLOTTE CATS IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 23, 2004 Charlotte, N.C., June 23, 2004� For the first time in over 65 years, Charlotte will hear the sounds of a trolley car clicking down the tracks from Historic South End all the way into Center City Charlotte. Join the Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS), Mayor Patrick McCrory, Charlotte Trolley, Inc., Charlotte Center City Partners and Historic South End on Friday, June 25 at 9:00 a.m. at the Tremont Station, located on Tremont Avenue between South Boulevard and Camden Road, for the official throwing of the switch to return trolley service back to the Queen City. The unveiling of the commemorative poster introducing the new trolley service will also happen at this time. “Charlotte has a rich history of rail in this area and we are honored to bring back a piece of nostalgia to Charlotte,” said Ron Tober, CATS’ Chief Executive Officer. CATS will operate the initial trolley service with Car 85. This car is the only remaining electric trolley car in Charlotte that operated until 1938. Three replica trolley cars will be arriving this summer to provide expanded and more frequent service along the trolley line. “This is a momentous occasion for the City of Charlotte,” said Mayor Patrick McCrory. “The restoration of trolley service is a great example of private public partnerships working together to benefit the whole community and spurring economic growth in the Queen City.” “The investment value along this corridor is now at $400 million, and we expect it to increase even more because of the thriving offices, housing, and entertainment businesses. The opening of the trolley line will spur further development, but it also provides the city with a new historic cultural amenity, as well as a transportation choice, all rolled into one,” McCrory said. The trolley line runs approximately 2.1 miles with 10 stations along the line. The stations include stops at Atherton Mill, Tremont, East/West Boulevard, Park Avenue, Bland Street, Morehead Street, Stonewall Street, Convention Center at Second Street, Sixth Street and Ninth Street. Hours of operation are from 11:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday.� On Fridays and Saturdays the Charlotte Trolley will run from 10:00 a.m. 11:00 p.m.� Sunday service will start at 11:00 a.m. and end at 6:00 p.m. Fare for the trolley is one dollar. Children 12 years old and younger accompanied by an adult and customers 62 years and older can ride for 50 cents. Children 46 inches tall and below ride the trolley service for free. Riders can purchase tokens at the Charlotte Transportation Center located at 310 E. Trade St. or at the Trolley Barn, located at Atherton Mill. Riders with retro Charlotte Trolley tokens that were purchased prior to June 28 may continue to use them for a full fare. These tokens will be retired this fall.

New East San Jose trolley line opens to eager riders San Jose Mercury News June 23, 2004 Ballons floated in the breeze, colorful confetti rained down and politicians made flowery speeches. All while future riders — hundreds of them — patiently waited for the trains to arrive at the towering overpass south of the Great Mall in Milpitas. And, finally, the bells of the trolley could be heard. Light rail service to East San Jose began today, more than a decade after then councilman Ron Gonzales began lobbying for the $435 million, 6.3- mile extension that runs down Capitol Avenue to Alum Rock Avenue. At least 1,000 people attended the hour-long ceremony, a huge throng for this kind of event. When the Highway 101 widening north of Morgan Hill — a vital transportation improvement — was dedicated last summer, a couple of hundred people showed up and most were state officials or local political honchos. The difference today: most were residents of Milpitas and East San Jose, ones who have hungered for improved transit for years. Many rode a bus to the rally, and took light rail home. There were moms pushing kids in strollers, an old man holding the hand of his granddaughter. Shoppers walked over from the Great Mall. Kids and teachers came from nearby schools. One fellow wore a conductor’s hat. An elderly man limped on a cane. Retired couples, young families. All were here. Smiling. ``I’ve been watching this get built every day for the last few years,’ said Roseann Valenzuela, 33, who lives off Capitol Avenue and brought 11- year-old Frankie and 6-year-old Samantha along, arriving more than an hour before the 11:30 a.m. event started. ``I saw on TV last night that light rail was going to open and I said, `I have to be there. This is for me’.’’ This is supposed to be the meat and potatoes line for the Valley Transportation Authority, since two of every five current transit users live in this area of town. But few are certain how many riders the new line will attract, not after a deep loss of passengers due to the dot-com collapse and the layoffs of nearly 200,000 workers. Its success may depend more on what is built in this area, not what is already here. Unlike in Mountain View where high-density housing and office buildings began popping up years before that extension opened in 1999, considerable land remains vacant along Capitol Avenue. But San Jose has made numerous changes in land use policies, trying to attract more condos and office sites along what has mostly been a residential street. ``A lot of those vacant parcels have been rezoned to feed transit operations,’’ said Jack Collins, the chief construction manager for the VTA. ``We’re hoping to see a lot of development over the next few years.’’ There’s the rub. People will take a train or bus if they live close to a station or stop. In the sprawling Silicon Valley where a three-floor condo complex is considered a high-rise, high-density building, well, it’s a far cry from downtown San Francisco or even Oakland. A few years ago when Cindy Chavez held a neighborhood meeting in her San Jose council district on the east side, about 45 people showed up. She wanted to talk about light rail plans; few of her constituents did. Finally, she asked: how many people had ridden light rail. One hand went up. ``Why would they?’’ Chavez thought to herself. ``Light rail was mainly for downtown.’’ Not anymore. Studies are under way to extend the trolley at least as far as the Eastridge Shopping Center, where a major transit hub now brings together buses from throughout the valley. And Chavez and Supervisor Blanca Alvarado are strong supporters of extending tracks down Capitol Expressway to Highway 87. New taxes may be needed for those upgrades, and whether voters will approve more spending remains to be seen. But getting trains to the east side seems to be a fit for many. ``I wasn’t expecting this many people,’’ Gonzales said of today’s turnout. ``It’s an indication of the hard work that has gone into this project and the support for it.’’ For Valenzuela, it means a way for her 17-year-old son Adrian to get around. He’s hunting for a summer job and mom has already laid down the law: ``Don’t give me that excuse `mommy, I don’t have a ride’,’’ she said. ``Start working. And I know how he’s going to get there. Light rail.’’ When Gonzales joined the board of supervisors in the early ‘90s, the focus was on extending trains to Campbell and Mountain View. Whoa, he said, beginning a 15-year effort to get trains into the east valley. It’s an effort appreciated in many circles. ``I like to thank San Jose and the rest of the county,’’ said San Jose councilwoman Nora Campos, who represents the area, ``for not forgetting us.’’

BEECHVIEW LOSING T STOP? PERISH THE THOUGHT Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania June 23, 2004 Maybe it was the Port Authority’s talk about providing faster, more efficient Light Rail Transit service to and from the South Hills. Maybe it was the appearance of a “counter” from 5 a.m. on May 24 until 1 a.m. the following day at the Traymore Avenue T stop in Beechview. Maybe it was the fact that Traymore Avenue is the second least-used T stop. Whatever it was, some Beechview residents began to worry that the Port Authority might be planning to eliminate the stop. That prompted Virginia Noceti of Sebring Avenue, a self-described “little old great granny,” to sit down at her vintage typewriter and clack out a letter to ask if I could find out what plans, if any, the Port Authority has for the Traymore Avenue stop. If the Post Authority closed it, Noceti said, she and her neighbors would have to “hoof it” up and down Sebring in their section of the “Beechview Alps,” hang a left on Platt Avenue and descend a set of concrete steps to the Pennant stop. It’s about a half-mile trek. “The steps at Pennant are extremely steep for those of us who no longer have agile legs,” said Noceti, who is 77. “I just wouldn’t be able to pick up and go as much as I do now if the Traymore stop is closed. I’d feel like a prisoner in my own home.” Port Authority spokesman Bob Grove has good news for Noceti and her neighbors. “The Traymore stop is not being eliminated, nor has there been any internal discussion to that end,” Grove said. “When it was last counted on May 24, a total of 16 persons got on or off cars at both the inbound and outbound platforms during the entire day [5 a.m. until 1 a.m.],” he said. So where’s the least used of the system’s 74 stops? “Mine 3 on the Library line near Washington Junction,” Grove said. “It had nine people get on and off the last time we had a counter there.” In response to questions raised by Noceti and me about Port Authority service in Beechview, some of which are expected to be raised at a meeting at 7 p.m. tomorrow at St. Catherine of Siena Church on Broadway Avenue, Grove said: “With the routing of Library service via Overbrook, the frequency of service through all stops between Castle Shannon and Palm Garden … has dropped very slightly. During peak [periods] through Beechview, there is a car, on average, every 4.5 minutes now, as opposed to every 3.5 minutes previously. “Off peak, there is a car every 15 minutes now, compared to every 10 minutes previously. We do not regard these as dramatic service reductions, and midday off-peak service frequency improvements are planned for this fall,” he said. Phyllis DiDiano, president of the Beechview Area Concerned Citizens, the group that is sponsoring tomorrow night’s meeting, said residents want to know if they will have to pay more to use the T to go to South Hills Village. “Trips from Beechview to South Hills Village will not cost more in the future,” Grove said. “When 42C service between Castle Shannon and Downtown Pittsburgh is initiated, it will operate only during peak periods — about 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.,” he said. Persons traveling between Beechview and South Hills Village during peak periods will be required to make a transfer at Overbrook Junction, located between Castle Shannon station and Martin Villa. “This location ensures a very convenient transfer, and customers can obtain a continuation transfer at no cost,” he said. Under that plan, off-peak service between South Hills Village and Pittsburgh will be unchanged. No transfer will be needed. “As we have stated previously, the full operating plan, once in effect this fall, will benefit all customers north of Castle Shannon by increasing seat availability.” Noceti said she plans to attend tomorrow’s meeting. “I hope they’ll allow us to speak,” she said. I’m sure they will. Would you want to tell “a little old great granny” she couldn’t ask a question? Me neither.

Heading East for �247m monorail deal Birmingham Post June 23 2004 Midland manufacturer Severn-Lamb is poised to sign the biggest contract in its history with a �247 million deal to build a new monorail system in the former Soviet Union. Representatives from the Warwickshire-based company will travel to Washington next month to seal the deal for the new transport system in Almaty, the capital of Kazakhstan. It follows the company’s success in building platforms for the opening ceremony of the Athens Olympics this summer and a transport system at the new Disneyland Hong Kong due to open next year. Heinz Roosen, managing director of Severn-Lamb, said the new monorail contract would have significant spin-offs for other regional manufacturers. Severn-Lamb will spend the next five years building the 46 trains, each with six carriages, which will operate on 50 miles of track which is planned in Almaty. Mr Roosen said: “This is a massive project and we will definitely be needing some help with it. “This will keep us busy for the next five years. “As soon as we have formally signed the agreement we will be approaching other companies to help build the trains.” The monorail is being funded by a group of American financiers, who will operate it for the first ten years before handing it over to the authorities in Kazakhstan. The deal will see a massive change at Severn-Lamb which currently employs around 50 people and has a turnover of �6.5 million. Mr Roosen said the deal could mean the company taking on more project managers to oversee the outsourcing work. He said up to 20 extra people could be taken on while the project is completed. “This is the culmination of 14 months’ work developing and designing a monorail. It’s a whole new concept for us in that it is a walk-through train, and we are delighted to have won the contract. “We managed to beat major competitors like Hitachi to win it. “It is quite a big step up for us. Although we have built monorails in Italy and Malaysia this will take us to the next level. “It’s like having a BMW Series 3 and now we’ve gone straight to the Series 7.” Mr Roosen said he hoped the Almaty monorail, which will be able to travel at speeds up to 70kph, would prompt further projects closer to home. Exports at present account for 90 per cent of the company’s sales. He said: “This is a wonderful shop window. “Almaty is a city which has transport problems like Birmingham and is using a monorail system to help alleviate them. Over there people are having to spend two hours in their cars when they go to work. “They recognise the need to do something. “They started an underground ten years ago but abandoned it because it became too expensive. “We would love to be able to do something like this monorail in Birmingham.” Francoise Severn-Lamb, a director of the company, said: “No contract is too big and this one is going to keep us busy for the next five years. “It means we can sleep happily instead of fighting day after day. “We are now looking to work with local companies and share that happiness around. “We are trying to employ local people and work with local companies. “It is important to keep things around us.”

Le Mans chooses Alstom Light Rail Transit Association June 23, 2004 On 29 June the Council of the Urban Community of Le Mans, France, is due to confirm an EUR 54 million contract with Alstom for 23 Citadis low- floor trams, for its new tramway due to open by the end of 2006.

S N Pal , Managing director, Calcutta Tramways Company, On the CTC’s plans to improve operations. Times of India JUNE 23, 2004 What are your plans to improve the tram services in the city? We are trying to improve tram services and for that we are trying to reduce derailment of trams through better maintenance of the tracks. We have plans to introduce new routes like one between Shyambazar and Barrackpore. But it needs clearance from the sate government. Right now about 170 trams ply in the city. Are there any plans to withdraw tram service from some routes? For withdrawing tram services from some routes we need the directive from the state government, as they provide 80 per cent subsidy to CTC. The tram service between Mominpur and Behala is presently under suspension due to the construction of the Taratala flyover, but we have plans to ply trams over the flyover once it is completed. How are you planning to maintain the tram tracks? It costs a lot in maintaining the tracks and so now we are mostly doing it on a patch-work basis. The new tracks are now laid by Hooghly River Bridge Commissioners (HRBC), but we have to work out a policy in maintaining these tracks. Are you going to introduce new bus routes? We are going to introduce 40 new Euro II buses from July. Some of these buses will be used in new routes. Soon there will be another new 140 buses and then some of these buses will be plied in some new long distance routes.

His Majesty opening the Subway on July 3 Khao Sod/Manager Daily June 23, 2004 The official opening of the subway system will be on Saturday, July 3, 2004. There will be 18 sets of subway rolling stock ready for the grand opening with 1 spare set, thus periodic maintenance must be applied stringently. His Majesty and the Royal Family will come to Hua Lamphong at 5:30 PM and ride subway all the way from Hua Lamphong to Bangsue. The people will have to ride the subway at Rama 9 Station to go to other stations only after the official opening ceremony is finished (for security reasons). The first 99,999 customers of Subway will receive the special commemorative gift from MRTA/BMCL. The traffic will is expected to be 40,000 passengers an hour. BMCL is guaranteeing that the subway is really safe to ride after passing the assessment