One of two bidders on monorail drops out; Departure renews critics’ calls for scrapping of project SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER August 7, 2004 The competition to build, operate and maintain Seattle’s $1.6 billion monorail is apparently over. One of two bidders for the 14-mile West Seattle-to-Crown Hill line dropped out of the running this week because it couldn’t come up with $550 million in required performance bonds. Team Monorail announced it would not submit a bid for the project. It would have used trains built by Bombardier of Canada. That leaves the team made up of a group of companies organized around Hitachi monorail trains, which now seems almost certain to win the contract. However, winning the contract could prove to be a short-lived victory; Seattle residents will likely vote in November on an initiative that would stop the project. Monorail critics say this most recent development shows that the endeavor is in serious trouble and should be scrapped. “If the largest train company in North America walks away from the largest project in the United States and walks away from a $2 million incentive to bid, it has to be that this is a significantly flawed project,” said Henry Aronson of the watchdog group Monorail On Track. Tom Horkan, Seattle Monorail director of design and construction, said the problem for the Bombardier team was that it wasn’t able to assemble a group that could meet the project’s qualifications. “They couldn’t demonstrate to us that they could get bonds that met our requirements, the $550 million in payment and performance bonds for the overall project,” Horkan said. However Horkan said the lack of a competitive bid is not likely to hold up the process. “We will be receiving one proposal on the 16th” of August, Horkan said. “We will continue on the process that we have established for ultimately selecting a contractor. That involves an evaluation of the proposal and then recommending to our board as to whether we should enter into final negotiations.” The exit of Team Monorail from the bidding process is the latest piece of bad news for the project, which Seattle voters narrowly approved in 2002. Last month opponents gathered enough signatures to put the project’s fate on the November ballot. Initiative 82 would make it illegal to build the monorail on city streets. If the measure passes, it would effectively kill the monorail. Critics also have complained that the monorail is not the same system voters approved. Parts of the project have been changed after initial tax revenues fell short. The monorail is funded by a 1.4 percent vehicle-license tax, which amounts to $140 a year for the owner of a $10,000 vehicle. In addition, Aronson said reducing the bidders to one puts taxpayers’ money in jeopardy. “The citizens were told that they would be protected by having open, competitive bidding, which would insure the best design at the lowest price,” Aronson said. “Now we have one bidder. … The agency has effectively lost all leverage in its ability to deal with the contractor.” Horkan said the taxpayers would still be protected. “If the proposal doesn’t meet the standards — there may be an opportunity … to revise the proposal,” he said. “Our evaluation is to make sure they meet all the requirements. “If we are not able to get to a point where the proposal doesn’t work financially or is not meeting our goals — we’ll go back to our board and discuss alternate ways to build the project.” The Seattle Monorail Project issued a request for qualifications for the project in April 2003 — two teams qualified to submit proposals to design, build, operate and maintain monorail, which is scheduled for completion for summer 2009. In March, the Monorail Project issued its final request for proposals. In April, Team Monorail sought to replace several members of the team after Kiewit construction quit. Team Monorail had been under evaluation since that request, according to Seattle Monorail spokeswoman Marjorie Skotheim. However, the team hadn’t been requalified. Seattle City Council Chairwoman Jan Drago said there are strict requirements protecting taxpayers during the bidding process. “That’s why it’s important to await both the evaluation of the bid and the City Council’s independent financial review before assessing the feasibility of the project,” she said. Tim Wulf of the Monorail Recall campaign said he thinks the issue should be taken very seriously. “The SMP (Seattle Monorail Project) should be saying, ‘Seattle, we have a problem,’ “ Wulf said.

Monorail project down to one bidder Seattle Times August 7, 2004 Bombardier’s monorail team has dropped out of the running to build the 14-mile Green Line, leaving just one bidder. This puts even greater pressure on the project to prove that concrete tracks and finicky Seattle neighborhoods can coexist. The Cascadia Monorail team will submit the lone bid this month for roughly $1.3 billion worth of guideways, stations and Hitachi trains. Jon Magnusson, a Seattle structural engineer who criticized the project last spring, said the need for public scrutiny is greater than ever. “The point is, you don’t have a choice anymore,” he said. Among the reasons Bombardier, one of the world’s largest train suppliers, pulled out was because its team couldn’t provide financial guarantees by the Aug. 16 bid deadline. So does a single bidder mean a higher price to taxpayers, because there’s less competition? Does a single bidder mean the city gets a lesser design? Monorail executives insist the loss of a team will not diminish the project’s credibility or the odds of getting it built. “While we had hoped to receive proposals from two contractor teams, from the outset this process has anticipated that, eventually, we’d be dealing with one team,” said a statement yesterday by Joel Horn, Seattle Monorail Project (SMP) executive director. “Whether we receive one proposal or two, the successful proposal must still meet all our rigorous criteria to ensure that the taxpayer is protected.” Nils Finne, a board member for this fall’s anti-monorail Initiative 83 campaign, called Horn’s remark disingenuous. “It’s like saying you spent eight hours fishing and you end up with only one fish and say, ‘We were only going to eat one anyway.’ “ On the other hand, Bombardier’s “Team Monorail” and Cascadia have already been competing for almost two years, after voters approved the route linking Ballard, Seattle Center, downtown and West Seattle. Cascadia sent its proposal to the printer Monday — that’s 200,000 pages including multiple copies — and will not be changing either its price or design, its executives say. On the question of price, team executive Six Silva pulled out a copy of the voter-approved monorail initiative from 2002, which limits construction debt to $1.5 billion on an estimated $1.75 billion project. “If you want to build it, take heed,” he said. In addition, monorail funds are tight because car-tab taxes are coming in at less than planned. Design is a touchier subject. In other cities, Hitachi’s monorails are larger and more spacious than Bombardier’s. Kim Pedersen, president of The Monorail Society, believes they offer a smoother ride, as well. But to gain those advantages, Hitachi monorails have needed bigger support columns. Bombardier had proposed 4-foot-wide columns downtown (about the same size as existing monorail posts near Westlake Center) and to avoid blocking a lane of Second Avenue. “One of the things we lose is they [Bombardier] were bringing a lot of innovations,” said Don Wise, a downtown property manager with the critics’ group OnTrack. Cascadia has not disclosed its design, but executive Jeff Fielder said the team will propose overhead guideways that “fit into the urban fabric.” A few critics said the Seattle City Council, which already plans a financial review before construction starts, should also intervene in the design and technical issues. Longtime opponent Henry Aronson said the SMP does not enjoy “far-reaching trust” to steer the project. Many backers and skeptics urge the agency to make the Cascadia bid public immediately, but the SMP says it will stick to its plan to conduct negotiations before releasing the details. The monorail board’s vice chairwoman, Kristina Hill, found some silver linings. A construction contract might be awarded two weeks or a month earlier with only one team in the running, she explained. Plus, the risk of the agency being sued by the losing bidder is gone, she said. Hill said the agency was intending to negotiate final design details after the bids anyway — and probably demand improvements — so the Aug. 16 bid is not the final word, she said. One reason Bombardier left was because its team was unable to provide $550 million in performance bonds in time for the Aug. 16 bid deadline, after two partners withdrew this spring. Another obstacle was an SMP requirement to make all major construction partners liable if the project failed. City Council President Jan Drago said even though one bidder is gone, the taxpayers were protected by the demanding process. “The flip side is that Cascadia is strong, because it is able to meet this standard,” Drago said.

Light rail’s July bounce Minneapolis Star Tribune August 7, 2004 Twins fans and the clanging novelty of new trains helped jump-start ridership on the Hiawatha light-rail line in July with 462,400 passengers — more or less. That’s about double Metro Transit’s projection of 231,400, officials said. The estimated daily average of 14,916 riders per day (nearly 16,000 on weekdays), comes from manually counting passengers on about one- fourth of all train trips. The random tallies, based on about 104 trips each day, were used to project totals for the full month, and Metro Transit officials said they are “very pleased” and “pleasantly surprised” by July’s total. Ridership is one measure of performance. Others include: - Injuries: No collisions were reported between trains and cars, trains and pedestrians or trains and bikes. One passenger made a claim for an injury after catching an arm in a train door. Metro Transit is investigating the incident. - Arrests: Transit police arrested 49 people on the rail line during July, mostly for public drunkenness or disturbing the peace. One passenger grabbed a driver through an open window, prompting a quick call for help. No assaults on passengers were reported. - No-pay citations: Police issued 31 citations to people who could not produce tickets. Tickets to ride cost $1.25 or $1.75. Citations for not paying end up costing $180, including court fees. Metro Transit said that on the whole its ticket-checkers found more than 99 percent compliance. - On-time trips: About 99 percent were completed as scheduled. In one instance, buses were used to carry passengers because of a power problem at a substation. - Gate-crossing arms: Twenty were broken or damaged when they came down on top of cars that stopped too close to the tracks. But numbers aren’t the whole story. A Japanese woman was tended to by paramedics aboard one train when she suffered a nosebleed. A boy struggled and finally succeeded in putting his bike into the built-in rack. An older woman squinted to read the instructions on a ticket-vending machine when glaring sunlight hit it straight on. About a dozen riders randomly interviewed by the Star Tribune generally gave high marks to the Hiawatha Line for convenience, safety, attractiveness and value. Some, who had not yet been asked to show their tickets, said they wondered whether everyone was paying their fair share. Transit officials said they are now using plainclothes ticket-checkers after finding that when uniformed employees got on board some riders quickly got off, apparently to avoid being checked. Ridership analysis After a weekend of free rides, paid service began June 28 along 8 miles of track between downtown Minneapolis and the Fort Snelling station. Four more miles will open in December linking Fort Snelling, Minneapolis- St. Paul International Airport and the Mall of America. Metro Transit changed 16 bus routes to intersect with seven rail stations on the first stage of the rail line. December’s extension will add five more stations, for a total of 17. Mark Fuhrmann, acting general manager, and Joe Marie, assistant general manager for rail operations, said they were encouraged that peak daily paid ridership of 19,300 occurred July 30, at the end of the month. That equaled the hoped-for weekday average for the entire line by the middle of next year. But Fuhrmann cautioned that it’s too soon to predict whether the first month will lead to steady ridership increases. It will take a year to get a fix on how the peaks and valleys caused by special events and weather translate into a pattern of daily averages. For example, the start of classes at the University of Minnesota could substantially increase ridership. Weekday ridership, the “bread and butter” of transit service, averaged nearly 16,000 in July while Saturdays averaged 13,500 and Sundays 11,900. Fuhrmann and Marie called the weekend figures unexpectedly high, because their projections were 4,300 and 2,100 respectively. Meanwhile, bus ridership in July was 8.4 percent lower than during July 2003. That could reflect not only the impact of rail service but also a fare increase, service cuts and the lingering effect of the 46-day strike of drivers and mechanics in March and April. Bus service resumed April 19, and ridership in the next 30 days declined 15 percent from prestrike levels. Fuhrmann said that 5 million bus boardings in July were about 96 percent of prestrike totals. Comparing first-month light-rail totals with those in other cities is risky business because of different circumstances. In Houston, for example, the first month’s total for its new rail line in January was inflated by Super Bowl riders. Through the first six months, Houston’s Metrorail ridership was 3,014,158 (now measured by automated counters on each car) compared with the original estimate of 3,300,536. One reason for the 9 percent shortfall was a delay in rerouting buses to connect with the rail line. Because of the rerouting, weekday ridership in Houston hit its highest average in June: 26,677, nearly double the figure in each of the five previous months. Pros and cons Ron Lloyd, president of Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1005, said the 33 drivers who have been trained to run Hiawatha’s trains seem to like their new jobs. But a better test might come after three months, he said, because their isolation from riders in fairly cramped quarters might take a toll. Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak praised the first month’s performance. While traffic tie-ups on Hiawatha Avenue and cross streets have angered some drivers and local residents, Rybak said, “We’ve made a lot of progress already on the light-timing issues … More refinement will mean more improvement.” Metro Transit spokesman Bob Gibbons said the agency is waiting for advice from federal highway officials on how to relieve remaining traffic jams generated when trains preempt traffic lights. State Rep. Phil Krinkie, R-Shoreview, a persistent critic of light rail, gave Metro Transit an A for safety and attractiveness. But he questioned whether the Hiawatha Line and the subsidy it requires will reduce pollution or congestion as its advocates contend. “It’s a huge public subsidy for ostensibly little benefit,” he said. The light-rail line is costing about $715 million to build, and its operating cost for 2005 is estimated to be $16.4 million. Fares are estimated to provide about one-third of that cost, Gibbons said. Comparisons of ridership with ticket revenue are not yet available. Metro Transit is preparing to test and operate the second leg of the line and to make several service adjustments: adding five ticket vending machines, updating software to reduce glitches and fine-tuning the supply of train cars to handle peak loads. On the whole, however, Marie praised the system’s drivers: “I don’t know of any new system that has gotten off to a better start. I’m pretty pleased.”

HERE’S BID TO GRAB SEAT ON RTA LINE Dayton Daily News (Ohio) August 7, 2004 Dear Greater Dayton (nee Miami Valley) Regional Transit Authority Board of Trustees: Please accept my application for your opening for an executive director. I realize that the position won’t be vacant until June, and you’re not officially recruiting yet, but I hope you’ll see my early application as a sign of enthusiasm and efficiency. I admittedly have no experience as head of a public transportation agency, but that means I’ve developed no bad habits. Besides, I have a great deal of experience in an area where I suspect most prospective executive directors fall short: I actually ride the bus. Granted, riding a bus does not take a lot of skill. Most anyone can do it. But few management types do, though it presents a perspective not found driving or being chauffeured to ribbon-cutting ceremonies for grand new buildings. It’s a perspective that should come in handy when making RTA decisions. Sure, operating buses has become a nuisance that interferes with the serious business of empire building, but unless you’re going to try to match drug store chains by having a hub at every intersection, the construction era may be ending. Naytheless, I’ll continue to seek grants for projects that have nothing to do with public transportation, on the theory federal and state grants appear as if by magic and don’t count as real money. Being a bus rider isn’t my only strong point of consideration. I also would be more than happy to work for the $150,000 salary currently budgeted for the position, without complaining about any lack of raises, trying to double-dip, or seeking special perks. And, unlike the managers you now have, not only will I talk to the media and try to answer questions fully and honestly, I’ll chat with the citizenry, including those lowly folks who are my fellow bus riders. That is not to say that I would completely revamp the way the RTA is now managed. I would be more than happy to keep up tradition by gallivanting to resorts and major cities around the world. And not only would I put all the frequent flier miles I collect into the RTA pot, I’ll toss in the miles I now have, which are enough for a round trip to your choice of Akron or Evansville. I’m an experienced traveler, adept at using the Internet to obtain the very best airline and hotel deals for my traipsing, which should save enough money to reinstitute some of the routes you’ve recently axed. And I use public transportation in other cities, too, so I can gather ideas that wouldn’t be noticed from cabs or limos. Unfortunately, I won’t be able to maintain all of your traditions, since I don’t have a Florida home at which to stop on the way to or from seminars or meetings. I hope that won’t disqualify me from consideration. I saw in the newspaper that a county commissioner is calling for a nationwide search. Hiring me will save the time, bother, and expense of such an effort. But if you go ahead with the search, I hope the first question you ask every interviewee is, “How often do you ride the bus?”

Streetcar desired? Council wants new way to travel on Jackson St. Northwest Asian Weekly August 7, 2004 The Seattle City Council last week proposed extending a streetcar route east from its current ending point in Chinatown/International District. If they get their way, the car could travel east up Jackson Street — perhaps all the way to 23rd Avenue in the Central District. However, some merchants in the neighborhood feel the streetcar would create negligible benefits at best, and reduce customer traffic at worse. Some said they did not know about the possible streetcar extension until this reporter informed them of it. Supporters of the Jackson Street option say it would boost business and connect the I.D., Little Saigon and the Central District. The City Council wants to prioritize the $47 million extension over the stand-alone $45 million streetcar route from downtown to South Lake Union, as proposed by Mayor Greg Nickels. Council members who support the Jackson Street option believe businesses and developers in South Lake Union have already received enough benefits and concessions from the city. Funds should be directed elsewhere in the city, like to the I.D., Little Saigon and the Central District. “We are not sure if (the South Lake Union streetcar) is an amenity or a necessity,” Seattle City Council member David Della said in support of the Jackson Street extension. “If a (streetcar) is a tool for economic development, why not build it in a neighborhood that needs it? … Given our limited resources it’s important to invest in the communities that need it the most.” Joining Della in signing a letter to Sound Transit requesting support are fellow council members Richard Conlin, Nick Licata, Jim Compton, Jean Godden, Richard McIver and Tom Rasmussen. Council members Peter Steinbrueck and Jan Drago did not sign it. Those in support of the Jackson Street streetcar hope to take it to voters on the next Sound Transit ballot in 2005 or 2006. “A stand-alone streetcar doesn’t do a lot for me,” Conlin, who is also the transportation chair, said. “A Jackson Street extension is something the community has wanted for a while now. From an economic development standpoint, this is something very useful.” The green and yellow streetcar currently stops in the Chinatown/I.D. at the intersection of Fifth Avenue South and South Jackson Street. Some business owners are skeptical that a streetcar could help revitalize the neighborhood. “(A streetcar) would be redundant,” according to Kevin La, manager of Chinatown Market on the northeast corner of Seventh and Jackson. “It’s useless. The bus takes care of getting people up and down Jackson.” Mui Dieng, who has owned and managed Asia Bar-B-Que on the 600 block of Jackson for 17 years, said recent changes in curbside parking limits in the neighborhood has negatively impacted traffic to her restaurant. She fears that the addition of a streetcar would reduce her clientele further. “A lot of people don’t stop anymore,” Dieng lamented. “Right now it’s very tough.” Despite the bus stop right outside her restaurant, Dieng said she draws virtually no business from bus riders. Dieng said most of her sales are from customers who drive to her restaurant to pick up their meals and leave immediately. Dieng suspects a streetcar would not attract business to her restaurant. She fears that it may clog traffic in front of her store and drive away loyal customers who usually drive to her restaurant. “I think (a streetcar) would make a difference,” Dieng said. “Right now people drive by and they don’t stop. One of the biggest proponents of the Jackson Street extension, Uwajimaya chairman and CEO Tomio Moriguchi, said the streetcar would provide yet another transportation option to and from the I.D. He believes it would steer customers to the local businesses. “In general I don’t understand why another transportation option would be bad for the area,” Moriguchi said. “It would move people back and forth easier. We should try to provide transportation any way we can. “It’s an opportunity for an area that’s going to boom, and we should be a part of that. It would be ill-advised to pass it up.”

Games preparation truly Olympic feat; Athens completes $ 12 billion in renovations to welcome the world The Houston Chronicle August 8, 2004 ATHENS, GREECE - Because the 2004 Olympic Games begin in five days, a preliminary session of mental gymnastics would seem to be in order. Close your eyes. Contemplate Houston. Include Reliant Stadium, Toyota Center, Minute Maid Park, every revision of the Southwest Freeway since 1990, Bush Intercontinental Airport, the West Loop, the Grand Parkway, the Metro rail line, the Audrey Jones Beck Building at the Museum of Fine Arts, The Woodlands and the downtown corridor. Imagine their simultaneous creation. Multiply by three. Open your eyes. You’ve just imagined what it’s like to land in Athens with five days to go before the opening ceremony of the 2004 Olympic Games. The Olympics will unfold in a city as old as the foundations of Western civilization, as new as the Monastiraki Square subway station at the foot of the Acropolis and as riveting as the twin arches of the Olympic Stadium where the flame will be ignited on Friday night. If it is your first visit to a city that has essentially been remade, by some estimates to the tune of about $ 12 billion in infrastructure improvements and games-related expenses since 1999, it’s enough to make you say “Wow.” And if you’re the woman who by force of organizational skills and personality has dragged a nation from the brink of humiliation to the doorstep of the Olympics’ triumphant homecoming, it’s enough to make you say the same thing. ‘It’s like a miracle’ “Every day I say, ‘wow,’ “ Gianna Angelopolous-Daskalaki, president of the Athens Olympic Organizing Committee, told the Chronicle. “When the whole thing started, there wasn’t a sign of a facility around. And now they have been transformed - the railway station, the tram, the suburban rail. “It’s like a miracle. But I know it’s not a miracle. It’s focused work for years now. The whole Athens area has been transformed.” The changes include Athens’ new airport, two new subway lines, an above-ground tram line from the central city to the southern coast, a suburban railway system and more than a hundred miles of new and upgraded highways in addition to dozens of venue construction projects associated with the 6 billion euros ($ 7.2 billion) in the official Olympic budget. Even Athens’ traditional landmarks have been transformed. Tourists still gravitate toward the Acropolis, but they do so now on a pedestrian mall closed to cars. The area remains busy, but there is an element of serenity. In fact, locals say the owls, symbol of the goddess Athena for whom the city was named, can once again be heard at night as tourists gaze at the Parthenon. “When the Olympic Committee gave the games to Athens, they wanted to find the ancient values of sport, culture and competition, and they wanted to see a modern expression of things that began here,” Angelopolous-Daskalaki said. “Those words - peace, friendship, unity - they have a different meaning here. They are part of the soil. And yet you see the modern installations, too, and it seems as though you have traveled in time.” Preparations stalled Olympic preparations languished for more than two years after Athens won the bid in 1997 before Angelopolous-Daskalaki, who worked on the initial bid, was summoned to get things back on track. News reports last summer focused on the probability that some venues and transportation projects would not be ready in time and that Athens’ abysmal traffic and Athenians’ tendency to delay action until the last minute would doom chances for a successful Olympic homecoming. However, each transportation element was in place as athletes and officials began arriving in Athens last week. The time of the 5-mile trip from the U.S. Embassy to the main Olympic park, which normally takes 30 to 45 minutes during weekday traffic, has been shaved in half for visitors by the creation of special Olympic lanes. Venues will not be open for inspection until Monday, but officials with the organizing committee say everything is in place. The Greeks, in fact, are almost desperate to ensure that the Olympics come off without a hitch. “We are not satisfied with 98 percent or 95 percent. No,” Angelopolous-Daskalaki said. “We want it 100 percent.” The cost of returning the Olympics to their homeland has been substantial. The State Accounting Office last month reported that government spending this year has increased by 12.7 percent, well over the 4.9 projection, while revenues have increased by 5.8 percent, well under the 9.4 percent goal set by Greece’s new government. The result is a 26 percent jump in the budget deficit to about 8.7 billion euros (about $ 10.4 billion), which means Greece will be in violation of European Union regulations on overspending. But Angelopolous-Daskalaki said Greeks will benefit for decades from the budget-busting necessities of the last three years. “None of the projects has been built for nothing,” she said. “They have upgraded Athens, and they will be helpful in the everyday lives of Athenians. The Olympics were a way to accelerate projects that were on the agenda but had been pushed aside. Now they are here, and they will be useful when the days after the Olympics are over.” Damage done Even though optimism abounds now, early problems have done their share of damage. Ticket sales picked up this week, but organizers will be pressed to meet their goals of selling 3.5 million of the 5.2 million available tickets, although they expect to meet ticket revenue projections. Also, Greek tourism officials say business is down 12 percent this year, and Athens hotels are slashing rates by 50 to 60 percent in a last-ditch effort to fill empty rooms. And then there’s the question of security. Travelers through Syntagma Square and Omonia Square in the central city pass armed troops on every major corner, the most visible element of a billion-dollar security umbrella that involves more than 70,000 army troops plus assistance from NATO. The present challenge - to pull off the first successful Summer Games since the events of Sept. 11, 2001 - is clear. The future challenge is to use the momentum generated by Olympics-related infrastructure improvements to build a better Greece once the Olympics are done. “Everything speaks to a successful Olympics, a magical Games,” Angelopolous-Daskalaki said. “When the stadium is lighted for the opening ceremony, we will remind the world that this is a country that has come from classical heritage, but has something new as well - new faces, people who are prepared to be competitive.”

NEXT STOP: ST. PAUL; Hiawatha’s early success provides momentum for other transit projects Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN) August 8, 2004 “Take me, I’m yours,” beckons one of the Hiawatha Line’s promotional posters, and tens of thousands of Minnesotans are responding. Although the new light-rail line won’t reach two of its key destinations - the airport and Mall of America - until December, ridership is running at double the expected rate. Even the optimists are, in the words of one transit official, “cautiously stunned.” Plainly, there’s pent-up demand in the Twin Cities for a high-quality alternative to driving - which prompts the question: What’s next? The obvious answer is St. Paul. As long ago as 1873 a street railway was imagined running down the center of University Avenue between the two downtowns, with major stops at the State Capitol and the University of Minnesota. “A gorgeous ligament, a bond of union,” one writer rhapsodized in the style of the day. Since 1999, Hennepin and Ramsey county officials have encouraged a modern rail version, both to ease mounting congestion on Interstate Hwy. 94 and to revitalize a forlorn University Avenue. Now, with Hiawatha’s successful launch in Minneapolis and Northstar’s likely emergence as the region’s first commuter rail line, St. Paul is finally poised. “There’s great optimism,” said Larry Dowell, president of the St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce. As evidence of a turnaround in his once-reluctant business community, Dowell said the chamber would soon announce its preference for light rail on University Avenue, what planners call the Central Corridor. “This should be a top priority not only for St. Paul but the region,” said Patrick Seeb, CEO of the St. Paul Riverfront Corporation, stressing the competitive value of a truly mobile Twin Cities. Translation: Without light rail, St. Paul fears being left out of the loop, and rightly so. Hiawatha will soon connect three of the region’s top five activity centers: downtown Minneapolis, the airport and the Bloomington strip. Downtown St. Paul and the University of Minnesota - itself a city of 100,000 students, employees and visitors - shouldn’t be left behind. A final light-rail extension that may make sense is the Southwest Corridor to Eden Prairie being studied by Hennepin County as a traffic reliever for hard-pressed suburban commuters. Given Hiawatha’s momentum, it’s appropriate to consider these expansions, as other cities already have (see chart). Only as a line becomes a system does light rail maximize its regional value. Metropolitan Council Chairman Peter Bell said last week that Hiawatha’s early success “enhances the prospects for the Central Corridor and other possible transit investments.” A key question for Central, he said, is whether it should be light rail or bus rapid transit (BRT). The Pawlenty administration will study both options, he said. A decision could come as early as this fall. It’s a tricky comparison. BRT pretends to be a cheaper version of light rail - stations and exclusive lanes, except using buses. Indeed, early estimates show BRT at about one-third the cost of building light rail on University Avenue. BRT is clearly a cut above conventional bus service. It offers more flexibility than rail, and is more cost-effective in most corridors. But, in a hyper-concentrated 11-mile corridor like Central, light rail almost certainly delivers greater long-term value. It’s less labor intensive and may be cheaper to operate, given the likely rise in future fuel costs and the short lifespan of buses. Light rail tends also to attract more riders, sometimes a lot more. When Dallas recently replaced BRT with light rail on a segment near suburban Garland, ridership tripled. Canada’s capital city of Ottawa recently supplemented its struggling BRT network with light rail, in part to regain riders. With more riders comes a greater potential impact on easing traffic. Denver’s transit agency estimates that portions of its new Littleton light-rail line took one-third of the auto traffic off a parallel roadway. Because it’s a faster, higher-quality, more permanent technology, light rail tends also to attract more streetside development, business volume and intangible appeal. Rightly or wrongly, people tend to see bus riders as those without cars and train riders as those who choose to leave their cars at home. Most critical for the Central Corridor is this harsh reality: BRT would reach capacity by 2018, after which buses would bunch up in mixed traffic at the university and in downtown Minneapolis and BRT’s advantages would melt away. “It couldn’t handle the demand,” said Steve Morris, project manager for the Ramsey County Regional Rail Authority. Thus BRT, in the Central Corridor at least, appears to offer only a temporary fix, not a real solution. The added cost of patching up its shortcomings (by installing streetscape on University Avenue, digging a bus tunnel at the university, and fixing bus exhaust problems in the tunnel) could more than double BRT’s price tag to nearly $600 million, compared with light rail’s $840 million. But even then, buses couldn’t match the capacity and appeal of trains. In the final analysis, St. Paul and the University of Minnesota don’t want to play second fiddle, and they shouldn’t have to. See how they grow: Cities are quickly adding to their first light-rail lines. Metro area First LRT line Extensions System miles San Diego 1981 1984, 1990, 2005 54 Portland, Ore. 1986 1998, 2001, 2004 44 St. Louis 1993 2001, 2003, 2006 46 Denver 1994 2000, 2002, 2006 35 Dallas 1996 2002, 2003 44 Salt Lake City 1999 2001 18 Houston 2004 2008, 2009, 2012# 8 Minneapolis-St. Paul 2004 - 12 # In November 2003, voters approved a 79-mile LRT system prior to the opening of the first 8-mile segment in January 2004.

ROAD WARRIOR: Monorail continues to work out kinks Las Vegas Review-Journal (Nevada) August 8, 2004 Marc Tellez thought the Las Vegas Monorail’s first weekend of service last month would be a great time to try the fast train. But first, he had to wait in a slow line. At the Sahara Avenue station, the 42-year-old Las Vegan and his family found lines up to 40 people long snaking toward each of two lonely ticket-vending machines. Few of those people seemed to know how to use the high-tech ticket-spitters, slowing lines to a crawl. Simply put, it was like the DMV on a good day. “We went up there and it was kind of a nightmare,” Tellez recalled. “It took forever.” Forever being about one hour. But at the MGM Grand station, he found plenty of kiosks to choose from. “Maybe they didn’t think a lot of people would get on at Sahara,” Tellez said. Finding the right mix of ticket machines at individual stations was among the hiccups yet to be hiccuped from the $650 million monorail in the wake of its July 15 opening. But officials said the unexpected was to be expected. “(It was) nothing out of the ordinary of what you’d expect with a new transportation system,” Todd Walker, a monorail spokesman, said last week. Problems included isolated reports of a broken elevator and a jammed train door; a train crippled by mechanical problems one day; kiosks that had to be emptied of money more frequently than anticipated; and large numbers of riders unsure how to use kiosks or get from monorail stations to hotels not along its route. “As anticipated, the majority of our passengers are visitors. You have people who are new to the system on a regular basis,” Walker said. “It’s not a typical commuter system where there’s people used to using it. “All systems go through similar growing pains,” Walker said. Recent launches of light rail systems in Texas and Minnesota appear to back him up. Officials with Houston’s $324 million METRORail system report relatively few internal goofs, among them a balky electronic message board network, but big problems have come from outside its trains and stations. There have been more than 50 accidents involving cars or people since testing began in October, and scattered disruptions due to flooding or civic events since the line opened to riders in January. “You always anticipate there’s going to be a shake-out period,” said Ken Connaughton, a rail line spokesman. The June launch of Minneapolis-St. Paul’s $715 million Hiawatha light rail line was followed by traffic tie-ups at train/car crossings, a smattering of ticket machines going on the fritz and expectations that exceeded reality. “We have not been able to eliminate every single traffic delay,” said Joshua Collins, a project spokesman. “So many people had this expectation that by building light rail in that corridor, you’d eliminate every traffic problem in that corridor.” Richard Andersen manages a facility that, like the monorail, handles thousands of customers a day: Petco Park, the new $458 million home of the San Diego Padres baseball team. While a ballpark isn’t a train line, he notes the two civic projects share similarities in opening to the public. “I’ve been in this business for 28 years and been part of opening seven buildings,” Andersen said. “I’ve never been involved in the opening of a major facility where there wasn’t a number of unexpected operational issues. The best-laid plans are always subject to change when people start using the facility.” Petco’s opening found long concession lines, short food stocks, seats with obstructed views, seats placed too close to other seats, and trolleys overwhelmed by ridership demand. “The real test of a successful operation isn’t whether it has problems — they all do — it’s how they are reacted to,” Andersen said. The monorail’s biggest test may be how many riders use the service. Through the first three weeks of operations, the system averaged around 30,000 daily riders, below the 40,000 needed to break even. Monorail officials say they aren’t worried. They note the system is now operating at only 80 percent of its eventual 20-hour per-day schedule; it has yet to serve big conventions that are expected to be its ridership bread-and-butter; and tourists are still just learning of the system. To help those riders, officials have added new signage at various stations and a third ticket machine at the Sahara stop. They’ve ordered extra kiosks and kept a spare “hot train” ready to go at all times, Walker said. Future riders can expect other upgrades soon. Operating hours of 8 a.m. to midnight will grow to 6 a.m. to 2 a.m. sometime next month; escalators at the Convention Center station will open soon; and a retail center/VIP lounge at that station should open before the end of this year. Tellez wasn’t sure he’d be back on the monorail anytime soon. But that’s not because of his rough trip. “It’s really for tourists,” he said. “It’s more of a novelty.”

Christmas in August’ as Luas boosts trade by 25% Sunday Times (London) August 8, 2004 TRADERS in Dublin’s shopping centre have seen a dramatic boost in business since the Luas light-rail system went live last month. Some outlets have reported a 25% increase in trade. “It’s like Christmas in August,” said one retailer. More than 700,000 passengers have so far travelled on the Luas line between Sandyford and St Stephen’s Green. Connex, the tram operator, estimates that up to 20m passengers will travel in the first year. Tom Coffey, chief executive of the Dublin City Business Association said: “Between the Luas starting and the end of continual road disruption, more people are able to come in on public transport. We are predicting a terrific last quarter for Dublin traders.” Early reports from the St Stephen’s Green Shopping Centre suggest the centre has seen a 25% increase in the volume of customers compared to this time last year. In the first weekend alone, more than 75,000 people passed through the doors of the centre, representing a 35% increase on the same weekend last year. The increase in trade is “wholly attributable to the Luas”, said Dan Boyd, the centre’s director. Other large traders on Grafton Street have also seen a dramatic increase in trade. HMV, the music retailer, said it has had its “greatest summer sale to date” and attributes this to the new tram system. Several businesses along the tram line have also benefited. Tribeca, a popular restaurant in Ranelagh, said there has been a noticeable increase in early evening and night-time trade. Grafton Street is set to get a further boost when Marks & Spencer, as expected, applies for permission to expand its flagship store. The British retailer acquired the adjacent Grafton Arcade in 1994 for about E5m. The property is valued at E20m. With all but two of the leases in the arcade having expired, M&S is expected to redevelop the building. North of the Liffey, however, Clery & Co, which operates the Clerys department store and Michael Guiney discount chain, experienced a “difficult year” in 2003 as a result of infrastructure works on O’Connell Street. While turnover was flat at just over E29m its net profit for the year to the end of January 2004 rose from E67,921 to E118,538. Its profit and loss account, however, showed a loss of E252,906. Management insists “O’Connell Street will become a vibrant and thriving retail destination when works are finally completed in 2005”.

Keep old and new monorail on track SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER August 9, 2004 There will be no quick fix for the more than 40-year-old Seattle Center Monorail, nor should there be. The results of the Memorial Day fire, while certainly frightening for the 150 or so people trapped on the smoldering Blue Train, could have been far worse. Officials with the Seattle Center and Seattle Monorail Services, the private company that operates the system, were right to order up a comprehensive safety review and keep the trains out of operation until that review is completed. The cost of the necessary upgrades has not been determined but once it is officials will be faced with a crucial cost-benefit analysis of whether to repair a system that is due to be dismantled to accommodate the new, Seattle Monorail Project 14-mile trans-city system. An even bigger cost-benefit analysis decision looms for officials of the new monorail project, now that a single bidder remains to build that system. Under an ordinary contracting process, there could be concerns that the remaining bidder might jack up the price to take advantage of the competitive vacuum. But that’s unlikely under the Seattle Monorail Project’s extraordinary contracting approach — including a pre-set price and voter-established borrowing cap. The remaining bidder, Hitachi-based Cascadia Monorail Co. LLC, still must meet all the system requirements, at the right price, to win the bid. If it cannot, the promise to the voters is that the system will not be built. Ideally, the old monorail’s last years will be as productive as the new monorail’s future will be promising.

A SIGN OF TIGHTENED SECURITY IN THE DOWNTOWN BUS TUNNEL THE SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER August 9, 2004 Question: If it’s baseball season, you can bet Colin Walker can be found riding through Seattle’s bus tunnel on the way to Mariner games or a business meeting downtown. So imagine his curiosity when Metro installed a sign at the International District tunnel portal saying “Mandatory Security Stop” and, more recently, added a booth where security people could be found, next to the street leading to the tunnel. “It’s periodically staffed when I go into the tunnel,” Walker wrote in a recent e-mail. More curious was a lack of obvious security activity when he approached the booth. “I think I’ve only ever seen anyone in the booth once, and I’ve been to at least 15 games this year. The one time I saw someone there, they were reading a book,” Walker wrote. “Not only was money spent on the signs, but (to have) the county coffers paying for people to read a book is moderately troublesome. Is there a federal mandate that requires the mandatory ‘security’ stop?” Walker is more concerned about the expense of tax dollars than anything. “Sometimes the officer may look up from reading the paper, but they do nothing else - which I’m happy about,” Walker wrote. “I would absolutely hate to see things like what happened on the Amtrak train back east a week or so ago happen on a regular basis (all passengers’ names documented, pictures taken, things searched, basic civil liberties violated).” Answer: Metro’s deputy general manager, Jim Jacobson, said that’s not likely to happen in the near future. But what Walker noticed is part of the round-the-clock security that has always been posted at the tunnel but has been increased since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The most common security job at the tunnel is making sure people don’t drive into it at the end; about 20 drivers approach the portals each month and are turned away. That used to be a simple matter of turning errant motorists away. Now, post-9/11, guards check their IDs as well, watching for the possible terrorism suspect or other criminal. There is closed-circuit TV in the tunnel and there are regular sweeps of the tunnel and other Metro facilities to check for explosives, though none have ever been found. (For security reasons, Jacobson declined to give more detail.)Metro officials urge riders to watch for unattended packages and backpacks in the tunnel and on buses, and they periodically use dogs to search the tunnel and other Metro facilities for explosives, though Jacobson said none have ever been found. And what of those folks reading the paper and the books on the job? Jacobson said it’s possible the guards were trying to look innocuous while they watched for suspicious people or vehicles. But he said he’ll pass the word for the guards to be more vigilant. “It’s a wake-up call for us to make sure we’re doing the best job we can,” he said.

Monitors quietly keep tabs on MetroLink Each month, the crew of volunteers grades condition of stations St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Missouri) August 10, 2004 Like hall monitors of the transit world, a small volunteer group patrols the area’s light-rail stations with pens, report cards and a lot on their minds. Every month, they hit the 28 MetroLink stops in Missouri and Illinois in search of the neglected, the overlooked. They’re not transit professionals, but retirees and educators, businessmen and businesswomen. Still, the observations made by these 22 volunteers resonate. Their reports go straight to high-dollar, suit-and-tie administrators at Metro, the region’s transit agency. Citizens for Modern Transit, a local transit advocacy group, sponsors these station monitors. They’re the eyes and ears of the region’s light-rail system. And transit executives take notice. “It never hurts to have another way for us to hear from customers,” Metro spokeswoman Adella Jones said. And these customers have plenty to say. Every month, Richard “Al” Murray checks over the Forest Park and the two Lambert Field stations. He spends a while at each, watching and taking notes. He chats with passengers. On a July morning, the stations looked good. He even took a ride in the Forest Park station elevator — and sniffed. “Sometimes they don’t smell too good,” he said. “But it’s not bad at all today. They usually do a pretty good job at this station. They really do.” Some stations on Metro’s line used to be in rough shape, station monitors said. So in 2001, Citizens for Modern Transit got involved. The board of directors dispatched volunteers. Later that year, Citizens for Modern Transit presented its first monitor report. Transit officials responded with a thorough assessment of MetroLink stations and trains and put together a plan to correct the problems. “I think they’re really sincere,” Tom Shrout, Citizens for Modern Transit’s executive director, said of Metro administrators. “I think they’ve come to view this as an opportunity for improvements as opposed to confrontation.” Monitors report on everything from ashtrays that need emptying to train operator courtesy. They measure the height of weeds. They note sun glare. They report that in January 2003, three of the 26 lights at the UMSL-North station had burned out. Citizens for Modern Transit compiles reports every three months to show Metro officials. Monitors don’t just bash the stations. They applaud MetroLink, too. “Hooray for the new stainless steel trash containers,” one report said. “Flowers look great, as do the shrubs.” Before the program, Citizens for Modern Transit didn’t have a formal communication line with Metro. “We used to just say, ‘Passengers are complaining about such-and-such stations,’ and leave it at that,” Shrout said. “Nothing would happen.” Now, as a result of the reports, Metro officials are fixing the escalator at the Convention Center station, replacing fencing and handrails at all the stations and giving the East Riverfront station a major face-lift after years of disrepair. Mark Burkholder monitors the Civic Center station. He uses it to get from his downtown home to the University of Missouri at St. Louis, where he’s the dean of arts and sciences. On a rainy day last month, he noticed some mud build-up along the wheelchair ramp. “It’s pretty basic stuff we’re looking for,” he said. “But we know Metro looks at our reports.” Some problems persist here, he said. Burkholder has never seen a security guard at this station. Still, it’s always fairly clean, earning at least a “B” grade every month, he said. “I never have to send anybody to the principal.” A retired international banker, Murray used to live and work in London, where he became a public transit fan. “In years to come, this will be one of the things that makes St. Louis a good community to live in,” he said. “This is the beginning of a good system.” These station monitors can make it better, he believes. “By itself, this isn’t all that important,” Murray said of the reports. “It’s not going to change the fate of Metro. But added together with other programs, this can play a big part.” Waiting at Forest Park for his train to Lambert, Murray saw a raised lip of concrete near the platform edge. Someone could trip on it and fall. “That’ll go in the report,” he said, pulling out his pen. The problem was fixed soon after.

Ticket to renewal Light-rail service is driving development in downtown Plano THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS August 10, 2004 PLANO - The concrete foundation for a group of townhouses in downtown Plano has been dry barely a week, yet developer Richard Howe has already sold five units. He hasn’t broken ground on adjacent condominiums, but he has sold the two most expensive condos available. What’s driving the early interest in these homes built in the city’s oldest area? Foot access to Dallas Area Rapid Transit’s light-rail service, he said. Since DART began its light-rail service 20 months ago in Plano, commercial, residential and retail development is moving faster than city, business and DART leaders projected. So far, downtown Plano has attracted about $70 million worth of public and private investment for transit-oriented projects, said Frank Turner, Plano’s executive director for business development. And a program being considered by mortgage giant Fannie Mae may soon make it easier to buy Mr. Howe’s townhouses and condos. “I know if DART weren’t here, I couldn’t even get financing for the condos,” he said. “You still have to have other elements - culture, restaurants and shops - but DART’s made the difference. What I tell people is they are really just a few blocks away from Mockingbird Station or West End or the American Airlines Center.” These bright yellow trains are bringing more than commuters to the city center, but no one is giving DART the full credit. A park with a pond, the Interurban Railway Museum and 19th-century buildings do their part as well. But many say DART has been a catalyst for downtown redevelopment. And while Plano’s not the only area enjoying DART’s light rail - Richardson, East Dallas and South Dallas also have some signature development - the Collin County city is among the most closely watched. City leaders in Irving, Farmers Branch and Carrollton, where DART lines are planned in the next five or six years, are taking meticulous notes. In addition to Mr. Howe’s project - called 15th Street Village - new restaurants and shops are moving in, and a new apartment complex is about 98 percent leased. Robert Shaw, the Addison-based builder who brought Uptown to Dallas, took the first chance with his Eastside Village I apartments next to the 15th Street station. He began leasing nearly one year before service started; then he “doubled down” with the Eastside Village II complex on 14th Street. “More and more people are making a decision based on access to mass transit,” Mr. Shaw said. Restaurant arrivals As service started and apartments filled, restaurants such as J�rg’s Café Vienna, Coffee Haus, Kelly’s Eastside and Poppy’s Italian restaurant arrived. They either found homes in the historic buildings or opened on the ground floor of Mr. Shaw’s “new urbanism” apartment buildings. “Word is slowly getting out,” said Tim Kelly, who opened Kelly’s Eastside last November. “But we still need more restaurants and shops to bring more life to downtown Plano.” Still in the works is a program from Fannie Mae, a publicly traded corporation that buys mortgages from lenders. Fannie Mae is considering downtown Plano to test a transit-driven program designed to give borrowers considering a townhouse or condo near public transportation more home-buying power. A decision is expected in October. Should Fannie Mae follow through with the program, Plano would be the pilot city for the area, said Steven Bradley, senior director for Fannie Mae’s Dallas office. The initiative, Mr. Bradley said, is working in El Paso and other cities such as Pittsburgh, Salt Lake City and Philadelphia. Two assets Plano has two assets for transit-oriented development, said Robert Cervero, a professor of city planning at the University of California-Berkeley who visited Plano four years ago. The city has leadership willing to make zoning changes to accommodate redevelopment and an old commercial center that once served the city’s farming community, he said. “When I was there, all I saw were Ross Perot’s remnants” - the Electronic Data Systems campus at Legacy Park - “and the downtown was dead,” said Dr. Cervero, whose book, TOD in America, which is to be released this month, features a chapter on the Dallas area. “But the city had a plan and was willing to make changes, and that makes this a good case for the public sector to be out in front in some areas.” Getting ideas Farmers Branch, Irving and Carrollton are hoping for the same return once the rail lines arrive, perhaps as early as 2010. Greg Vick, the Farmers Branch assistant city manager, recently took a lunch-hour tour through downtown Plano. “We want to make sure we get it right because we’ve only got one chance,” Mr. Vick said. “We think Plano represents a lot of the ideas we are trying to use.” Last month, Farmers Branch named Harwood International Inc. to be the lead developer for Farmers Branch Town Center, a residential and commercial community to be built near the southeast corner of Valley View Lane and Stemmons Freeway. Construction on the first phase, a 7.4-acre apartment and retail complex, begins next year, said Harwood chief operating officer and general manager Tap Pritchard, who gleaned ideas from downtown Plano, Mockingbird Station and Addison Circle. Making plans Irving officials are planning for three DART stations and have prepared an area east of Lake Carolyn with new roads featuring a 40-foot-wide median designed to handle rail lines and a transit station. Carrollton city leaders want its downtown station, one of three, to be a North Texas hub for mass transit to include four lines: DART’s line to downtown Dallas, and separate lines to Denton County, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and downtown Fort Worth. Plano’s model may be studied by other cities, but it’s hardly the lone blueprint for successful transit-oriented development. This is especially true along DART’s north-south red line, which covers 27 miles from Westmoreland to Parker Road, one stop north of downtown Plano. The area in South Dallas near the Cedars Station includes the South Side on Lamar project featuring apartments and office buildings developed by Matthews Southwest. Gilley’s Dallas opened on Lamar between South Side and the Dallas Convention Center, and Poor David’s Pub is completing its move from Greenville Avenue to the area. The area also will receive a face-lift - landscaping, bike lanes, brick walkways - thanks to a $4.5 million grant. In East Dallas, Mockingbird Station is one of DART’s most familiar destinations thanks to the Angelika Film Center, restaurants, loft apartments and shops. Mockingbird Station has an advantage Plano and South Dallas do not: It benefits from being along Central Expressway and another major thoroughfare, Mockingbird Lane. Richardson - which has stations at Spring Valley Road, Arapaho Road, Galatyn Park and the Bush Turnpike - has an urban hub around the Galatyn Park station. The city built the Charles W. Eisemann Center for the Performing Arts, while Galatyn Park Corp. has developed adjacent land with the Renaissance Dallas North Hotel and a group of office buildings. The city recently approved zoning changes to permit construction of apartment and office buildings with ground-floor retail around Galatyn Park and Spring Valley. Changes such as these are essential to fostering transit-related economic development, said Bill Keffler, Richardson city manager. “You’re dealing with a different community fabric brought on by transit development, and you to have a complement of all the uses,” he said.

Rail replacing bus shuttle to Texans games ; Main Street line will leave fans at entrance to Reliant Stadium The Houston Chronicle August 10, 2004 Thousands of Houston Texans fans will need new travel plans to Reliant Stadium this year. The Texans, who kick off the preseason Saturday evening here against the Dallas Cowboys, are no longer offering Metro shuttle bus service to and from the stadium from four Outer Loop Park & Ride lots. With the Main Street light rail line stopping at Reliant Park, team officials decided to cancel their contract with the Metropolitan Transit Authority for the buses. “We have been anticipating the completion of MetroRail since we opened the stadium in 2002,” said Jamey Rootes, the Texans’ senior vice president. “It will take our fans a few games to get comfortable with this new game-day service, but we see it as an opportunity for fans to build new game-day traditions by riding to the games together and enjoying the many entertainment options that are available along the Main Street line before and after games.” Downtown boosters, some of whom are still upset that the Texans did not build the stadium in the city center with the baseball and basketball venues, are hopeful they can lure thousands of football fans to bars and restaurants before and after games - thanks to the trains. “This will give Texans’ fans an opportunity to visit restaurants and shops along the light rail line,” said Barry Mandel, president and CEO of the Houston Downtown Alliance. “They can also enjoy the entertainment of downtown after the game.” The decision is not likely to sit well with many suburbanites, however, who relied on the shuttle buses to ferry them to the stadium without the headache of battling traffic and paying high parking fees. The 4,500 or so fans who used the buses each game last season will have to purchase Reliant Stadium parking passes in advance or park somewhere along the rail line and hop the train. Another option is to ride a regular Metro bus route, dozens of which connect with light rail stations or pass by the stadium. Many commuter buses from outlying areas do not run on Sundays, however, limiting that possibility for many. Metro spokesman Ken Connaughton said the authority requires any special-event host to help cover the cost of operating shuttle buses. “There has to be a sponsor for 50 percent of Metro’s cost of providing the service,” he said. Connaughton adds that the Texans “have contracted with Metro to have buses standing by at Reliant Park so if there are too many people at one time for the train to handle, buses will run parallel service taking them back to their cars along the rail line.” MetroRail, which opened Jan. 1 and has carried tens of thousands to Reliant Park events including the Super Bowl and the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo, will operate at its standard weekend frequency of every 12 minutes on game days. But extra trains will be on standby if crowds grow beyond the normal capacity. On special-event days, Metro couples two rail cars together, increasing each train’s capacity to about 400 people when stuffed with standing riders. While some will be inconvenienced by the elimination of buses, the trains provide an opportunity for some to save on parking costs. Meters downtown are free on nights and Sundays, meaning fans can park on the street at no cost and ride the train all day for $ 2 per person, plus enjoy establishments downtown and in other neighborhoods to and from the game. “We’re really excited about this new opportunity for fans,” Mandel said.

MTA: DITCHING BUSWAY WOULD BE DISASTER The Daily News of Los Angeles August 10, 2004 VAN NUYS - Halting the $330 million Orange Line busway will rob the San Fernando Valley of a much needed rapid transit corridor and lead to an unprecedented waste of taxpayer money, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority said Monday in an appeals court filing. On Aug. 2, the California Court of Appeal ordered construction stopped until at least Wednesday so the MTA could make its case that the project should continue. Earlier the court said the MTA should also evaluate the viability of a Rapid Bus network in the Valley, a plan backed by Citizens Organized for Smart Transit. The 60-page MTA filing says that evaluating the Rapid Bus option could take nine months and cost taxpayers up to $109 million, including rebidding the project, and result in the loss of $68 million in state funding. The filing also notes that the MTA has already spent $100 million on the project, which is 30 percent complete. If the busway is scrapped, up to $189 million in taxpayer funds will be lost though what has already been spent and what it will cost to demobilize the project, the MTA said. COST initially sued to block the project last year, but the case was dismissed in Los Angeles Superior Court. COST appealed, and in July the state Court of Appeal ruled that the rapid bus study should proceed. COST must respond to the MTA filing by Wednesday, and the court is expected to make a quick decision. Potentially making all of this moot is a bill introduced Monday by Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-Van Nuys, that would retroactively exempt the Orange Line from the appeals court ruling. Levine said enough study has been done on the busway. “What you’ve got here is a very small group of people standing in the way of progress for the entire San Fernando Valley region,” Levine said. “It’s got a number of benefits for air quality in the Valley, getting people out of their cars and into clean-burning natural gas buses.” Diana Lipari, COST chairwoman, was surprised by Levine’s move. “My right to monitor my government agencies would be taken away by this legislation,” she said. The MTA’s filing came several hours after Valley civic leaders and elected officials excoriated COST and the appeals court for stopping the project. “Delays caused by the COST lawsuit and the court’s subsequent action put the Metro Orange Line’s August 2005 date in jeopardy and are costing taxpayers over $70,000 each day work is stopped. COST is costing us money,” Bruce Ackerman, president and chief executive officer of the Van Nuys-based Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley, said during a morning rally. “Traffic in the San Fernando Valley along the 101 corridor is a mess,” said Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, chairman of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board of directors. “The one hope we had to do something about this mess was the the Orange Line.” He vowed that the project will be finished, regardless of cost, and will take the issue to the California Supreme Court if the appeals court decision goes against the MTA. Lipari, who attended the rally, said officials were simply dispensing “platitudes and half-truths.” She disputed claims that the busway would take 20,000 cars off the road. The Rapid Bus system makes more sense because it will move more people around more of the Valley, she said. And she doubts that the cross-Valley buses will get all the traffic-signal priority officials promise. “The real facts are that it’s a safety hazard, and I think it’s going to do horrible things to north-south traffic,” she said.

Metro to get more than $12M in DOT funding Houston Business Journal August 10, 2004 Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Tx., announced Tuesday that the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County will receive more than $12 million from the U.S. Department of Transportation. The funding is for environmental impact studies and preliminary planning and engineering of the Advanced Metro Transit Plan. “The Metropolitan Transit Authority is on track to build a suitable mass transit system for the people of Harris County,” Sen. Hutchison said. “I recognize the need for an effective rail system in Houston and I will continue to support this effort in Congress.” Hutchison is a member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation.

GBP 600M TILTING TRAINS FAIL TO CUT TRIP TIMES; SLOWER THAN 40 YEARS AGO The Express August 10, 2004 SIR Richard Branson’s pride and joy - his GBP 600million fleet of tilting trains - has fallen victim to the curse of Britain’s railways. The 140mph trains are likely to have no faster journey times than British Rail’s locos from as long ago as the Sixties. And toilets on the 53-train fleet have been overflowing or locking due to a technical fault. Some Virgin West Coast trains have been left with just one working toilet on the long journeys from Glasgow to London. At least one train has had to make an unscheduled stop at a station so that passengers were not caught short. Virgin has had to take some trains out of service for modifications - and replace them with old rolling stock destined for “heritage” train operators while manufacturer Alstom carries out modifications. The setbacks to Sir Richard’s dream of a new era of luxury high-speed trains comes just days after a sister company, Virgin Cross Country, was threatened with being stripped of its franchise up to eight years early by the Strategic Rail Authority. Sir Richard placed a GBP 1.2billion order for the fleet of Pendolino trains two years ago in a bid to give Britain high-speed inter-city services. But a study yesterday revealed that when his new timetable comes in at the end of September journey times will be little better than decades ago. Most services between London and Glasgow will take more than five hours to cover the 402 miles - the same as 1974 when the line was electrified. One train a day will make the journey in four hours and 39 minutes - a minute less than the fastest time recorded. But that record was clocked 15 years ago in the days of British Rail. The standard time between London and Liverpool, a distance of 192 miles, will be the same as in 1966 - two hours and 30 minutes. Between London and Birmingham, a journey of 112 miles, the fastest service will show a 12minute improvement on 1967 to one hour and 21 minutes. But standard journeys are likely to take one hour 35 minutes, much the same as 37 years ago. The 188-mile London to Manchester route will see typical times of two hours 16 minutes - and a fastest time of two hours and six minutes - compared with two hours 20 minutes in the Eighties. Sir Richard has all but given up hope of running the trains at their top speed of 140mph because the track will not be good enough despite a GBP 7.6billion upgrade heavily subsidised by the taxpayer. He has had to cancel three services a day on the west coast to allow the new trains to undergo modifications. A Virgin spokesman said the comparison in journey times was unfair because they looked at the fastest times in past decades when the track was much less congested and compared them with standard times now. He added: “The changes to the timetable in September are not the end of the story. The timetable is evolving. For the past four years the west coast main line has effectively been a 400-mile building site - and it will continue to be for some time.” An Alstom spokesman said: “This is an advanced technology train. We’ve had some issues with them but teething problems are to be expected.”

NO SPITTING, NO SMOKING, NO PICTURES; NYC BUSES, TRAINS MAY BAN PHOTOGRAPHY , AS PEOPLE WITH CAMERAS ARE EYED AS POTENTIAL TERRORISTS Hartford Courant (Connecticut) August 11, 2004 Not everyone would agree on the photogenic merit of a gritty train yard, a subway station or a power plant in an industrial wasteland. But some photographers have discovered that their interest in such elements of the urban landscape can draw unwanted scrutiny from security officials and wary citizens. In the era of hair-trigger security alerts that have Americans looking for terrorists in their midst, the camera has become one of the everyday objects that can seem sinister in some settings. Taking photographs of a potential target, the reasoning goes, could be part of a terrorist’s plan of attack. Unfortunately, that thinking is what transformed David Sommer, a 43-year-old train enthusiast from Mount Vernon, N.Y., into an apparently shady character. In July, Sommer positioned himself near a fence behind his apartment building and, holding his digital camera over the fence, snapped some shots of the track work taking place on the Harlem Line of the Metro-North Railroad. His hope was to win a better camera in a contest by Trains magazine. But soon he was surrounded by five police cars responding to a call from a vigilant woman in a nearby office building, Sommer said. He was questioned for half an hour about his motives by police officers who seemed to doubt his intelligence. “They said, ‘Do you think that’s wise in the times we’re living in.’ But I’m not thinking about the times we’re living in. I’m thinking about winning a camera,” Sommer said. Describing himself as bald, chubby and partial to Hawaiian shirts and shorts, Sommer wonders how he could ever be seen as a threat to national security. But his camera has gotten him into difficulty twice more, at a Metro-North station and a Long Island airport. It wasn’t the questioning he objected to, Sommer said; it was that his explanation didn’t appease some of his questioners. “My position is, check everyone out. But once you establish that the person poses no threat, don’t tell them to beat it and go home. Everybody was trying to do the right thing, but they need to find the balance between concerned investigation and hysteria,” he said, pointing out that he had not trespassed to take his pictures. Rail fans, it seems, are particularly vulnerable to suspicion. “This whole hobby is fueled by pictures,” said the publisher of Trains magazine, Kevin Keefe, who estimates that half of the magazine’s 110,000 readers venture into the field to photograph trains. “Every railroad fan has a story about being rousted. It kind of goes with the territory,” Keefe said. “But now with 9/11, it’s become a big concern to a lot of railroad enthusiasts. We should have seen it coming, but now we hear about it all the time.” In New Jersey, where there is more rail traffic than in Connecticut, rail fans have been up in arms about photography restrictions instituted by the New Jersey Transit Corp., requiring photographers to obtain permits to shoot pictures of New Hersey Transit trains, buses and facilities. “Is this Eastern Europe or something? A lot of guys really felt like their toes were getting stepped on,” said Tom Nemeth, editor and publisher of Railpace Newsmagazine. “We’re referring to this as a ‘photo ban.’ Our contention is that if you need a permit, it’s a ban. It still has a chilling effect.” Devotees of New York’s mass transit system face similar restrictions, as New York City Transit in May proposed a ban on photography or filming without permission, as was the rule from the 1930s until 1994. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is expected to decide whether to reinstate the rule after a public comment period has concluded, probably at summer’s end. “This is a police request,” said MTA spokesman Tom Kelly. “What this does, in essence, is give them the authority to decide to investigate. “If your name is Columbus, and you want to take a picture of the sign at Columbus Circle, take the picture.” Kelly said. “But why would you be standing at the end of a platform taking all kinds of pictures of the interlocking network and stuff? That’s another story.” For an active niche of the New York art community, however, the murky world of the subway system and the people who use it represent the true face of the city. “If you want to capture the picture of the city at a given time in history, just go down to the subway with a camera,” said Jake Dobkin, publisher of a blog called Gothamist. Dobkin posts photographs almost every day on his photo blog, bluejake.com. He was one of the dozens of photographers and photo bloggers who rode the subway as a mob recently, snapping pictures in protest of the proposed photo ban. He said he gets stopped and questioned at least once a month, and not always in the subway. “Usually the people I have the most problems with aren’t the police. It’s the private security guards who aren’t as aware or as concerned with the constitutional arguments. When they put a hand on your camera or touch your tripod, it can become a problem,” he said. Connecticut photographers have fewer restrictions to consider. Connecticut Transit, for example, has no policy or regulation banning photography of or aboard buses. And the proposed ban by New York City Transit would not extend to Metro-North, although the commuter network has seen stepped-up security overall as a result of recent terrorism alerts. Motivated by his own run-in with an overzealous manager at a superfund site, Bert Krages, an attorney in Portland, Ore., wrote a handbook on amateur photographers’ rights. Krages said the handbook has been downloaded about 90,000 times since he posted it on his website in 2003; he gets about two calls each week from photographers who say they’ve been hassled. “I’ve been encouraging photographers to disabuse people of the idea that photography is a tool for terrorism. There really haven’t been any attacks that relied on photography for their implementation. The 9/11 attacks are a good example. They certainly didn’t need to take pictures of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon to know what they looked like,” Krages said. But just as important as knowledge of the law, apparently, is a grip on common sense. When Robert LaMay wanders over to Hartford’s Union Station a couple of times a week to watch the Vermonter trains roll in during his lunch hour, he always checks in with the staff. A member of the Connecticut Eastern Chapter of the National Railway Historical Society and a published author of books about trains, LaMay said he has had some confrontations elsewhere in the pursuit of the machines he loves, “but fortunately I haven’t had any bad experiences.” “I’ve been hearing a lot of horror stories on the Internet, but I can understand why it happens sometimes,” LaMay said. “I preach this to people: Let them know you’re there and why you’re there.”

Metro fires construction managers St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Missouri August 11, 2004 The region’s public transportation agency on Tuesday fired the four companies overseeing construction of the $550 million MetroLink extension because of project delays and mismanagement, according to documents obtained by the Post-Dispatch. The Metro system, already burdened with money problems, now itself must manage the massive public works project, which is expanding the light-rail train line from Forest Park west to Clayton, then south to Shrewsbury. Metro officials faxed the termination letters Tuesday afternoon to executives of the four companies, which are known collectively as the Cross County Collaborative. Richard Hardcastle, the group’s lawyer, said in an e-mail that the collaborative had no comment. Officials said they don’t know whether the firing will lead to more delays. Metro already has twice pushed back the projected opening of the extension to Clayton and Shrewsbury. It’s now expected to open in the summer or fall of 2006. “We can’t afford any more delays if we have any chance of completing this thing in 2006,” said Metro’s president and chief executive, Larry Salci. Earlier this year, Metro issued two letters of default against the collaborative. The letters were the first step in taking work out of the contractors’ hands. The collaborative handled the design and construction management of the rail-line extension. Metro initially hired the collaborative in May 2000 for $40.75 million but has paid the group about $47 million because of unexpected additional costs. The group is made up of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas Inc.; STV Inc.; Jacobs Civil Inc.; and Kwame Building Group Inc. The default letters, issued on Oct. 24 and June 11, said there were problems with the collaborative’s design work and its performance as construction manager. Representatives of the collaborative told the Post-Dispatch last month that they were surprised by the Metro system’s effort to fire it. The contractors also blamed Metro for millions of dollars in additional costs, including $14 million for 45 proposals for extra and additional design services, and payback for costs contractors incurred because utilities weren’t moved on time. Because those claims are a result of late utility relocations, the delays are Metro’s responsibility, the statement said. MetroLink’s 8-mile light rail extension is the agency’s most ambitious project since 2001, when it opened a new train segment in St. Clair County. The new extension is being paid for entirely with local taxpayer money. The project is one of the most expensive public construction works in the region, second only to Lambert Field’s $1 billion runway expansion. Administrators have said they will have to seek a local sales tax increase in 2006 to avoid massive budget shortfalls. The Metro system has already been forced to raise fares and cut bus service in recent years to pay its bills. Workers began construction on the light-rail extension in May 2003. Contractors almost immediately ran into delays. Unexpected utility lines and complaints about dump trucks by property owners in the Skinker-DeBaliviere neighborhood have set back the project. The collaborative’s contract for design and construction management was to run through May 4, 2005. At the time the contract was signed, Metro expected the extension to be open by May 30, 2005. Metro officials said it is common in the transit industry to hire multiple companies that act as a single group to handle projects of this magnitude. In recent weeks, the collaborative had proposed recovery plans that mentioned completion dates of August 2006 and January 2007, and $4.8 million in additional construction costs, Salci said. “So I basically said, enough,” Salci said. “We need to take control of this project, and we are.” So far, Metro has paid the collaborative about $38 million for design work and about $9 million for construction management, Salci said. The agency hopes to reach a settlement with the collaborative to recover any damages and costs. Salci said his agency was still determining how much it lost. Salci said he doesn’t know whether the project will now cost more than expected. “I want a total independent review by the new team before I make any proclamations about project cost or schedule,” Salci said. “I want to make sure I have new eyes on this thing before I make any decisions.” It’s unknown whether the collaborative will sue Metro for terminating the contract before it was up. By the end of week, Metro officials say, they expect to have 16 engineers, two design firms and a program management oversight consultant who will take over the project and work directly for the transit agency. Tuesday afternoon, Metro officials began taking back from the collaborative the equipment and documents involved in the project. “It will be a seamless transition,” Salci said. “Offices will be staffed tomorrow (Wednesday). Our contractors in the field are still working. There’s going to be no disruption to construction whatsoever.” St. Louis County will provide field inspectors to help in the transition, Salci said. Mac Scott, a spokesman for St. Louis County Executive Charlie A. Dooley, said that the county was closely watching the extension project and that officials were “obviously concerned” about Tuesday’s firing. Cross County Collaborative - Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas Inc.: The firm has engineered highways, subways, bridges, airports and tunnels around the world. It built the New York City subway system. The company had managed construction of Boston’s Big Dig, a tunnel and related expressway improvements through the city’s downtown. The company was lead consultant of a team that recommended in 1971 that the St. Louis region build a $1.5 billion, 86-mile rapid transit system, much of it underground. - Jacobs Civil Inc.: A subsidiary of Jacobs Engineering, Jacobs has been active in St. Louis area projects, including work as a managing partner for Lambert Field’s $1 billion airport expansion. It has worked on other area projects, including the new St. Louis County jail, two publicly owned parking garages in Clayton and the Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse. Several years ago, Jacobs purchased the Sverdrup engineering company, a prominent St. Louis company. Sverdrup was in the team of consultants that recommended in 1971 an 86-mile rapid transit system for St. Louis. - STV Inc.: The firm entered the transportation industry more than 50 years ago. Its projects include highways, bridges, airports, ports, railroad and transit systems. It has worked on the Big Dig in Boston, the Betsy Ross Bridge between Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and Southern California’s light rail system. - Kwame Building Group Inc.: Based in St. Louis, Kwame opened in 1991 with a handful of employees. The company has since expanded and handles projects nationwide. Locally, it has worked on several large regional projects, including work for Lambert Field and MetroLink. The company won the Mayor’s Spirit of St. Louis Award in 2003.

Metro sues fired construction managers St. Louis Post-Dispatch August 11, 2004 Four businesses managing a $550 million light-rail extension project cost the Metro public transportation agency millions of dollars, a year’s worth of delays and credibility in two states, according to a lawsuit filed by the agency on Wednesday. In addition, Metro claims to have missed out on a year’s worth of revenue and lost $1.7 million for work that was never done. Metro contends it had to increase fares for passengers who ride the bus to make up for lost money. Metro filed the eight-count lawsuit in St. Louis County Circuit Court a day after it fired the businesses, known collectively as the Cross County Collaborative. The lawsuit seeks unspecified monetary damages and the court’s approval to break the contract with the collaborative. Metro is suing the group made up of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas Inc.; Jacobs Civil Inc.; STV Inc.; and Kwame Building Group Inc. The lawsuit alleges breach of contract and negligence. The suit also accuses all the businesses except Kwame of fraud. Metro officials declined to discuss the 34-page suit, saying they could not comment on pending litigation. Richard Hardcastle, the collaborative’s lawyer, said his clients couldn’t make a statement because they had just received a copy and hadn’t had time to review it. The collaborative handled the design and construction management of the rail-line extension from Forest Park west to Clayton, then south to Shrewsbury. Metro initially hired the group in May 2000 for $40.75 million but has paid the group about $47 million because of unexpected additional costs. The portion of the lawsuit dealing with construction-related problems said the four businesses failed to develop contract and design schedules, provide proper cost estimates, staff the project adequately and coordinate with construction contractors. The list of claims that the collaborative’s design work was faulty is longer. It mentions the failure to: identify utilities that could affect construction; properly design crossings such as a bridge support; route the tracks over appropriate ground; identify all real estate and property rights; provide complete design drawings; get utility permits; and send complete bid packages out to contractors. The suit also contends the group failed to meet its disadvantaged-business hiring goal of 26.05 percent. As for the fraud claims against Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas Inc., Jacobs Civil Inc., and STV Inc., Metro says that the companies failed to meet the requirements of the contract and tried to cover it up. They also misled Metro about what they could do that led the transit agency to award them the contract, the lawsuit alleges. The three companies lied about staffing, designs, construction efforts and right-of-way acquisitions, according to the Metro lawsuit, as well as misled the agency about how much progress they had made in the design of the project. Metro says the three companies also billed the agency $1.7 million for work that was never done and shortchanged it 250 construction drawings. The pattern of trouble led to Metro’s “loss of credibility in the communities affected and the entire Missouri/Illinois Metropolitan St. Louis area,” the suit says. After Tuesday’s firing, Metro will now manage the massive public works project. Officials said they don’t know whether the firing will lead to more delays, but Larry Salci, Metro’s president and chief executive, said Tuesday that any more holdups could mean the extension wouldn’t open until at least 2007. Metro already has twice pushed back the projected opening of the extension. It’s now expected to open in the summer or fall 2006. The contractors, though, blamed Metro for millions of dollars in additional costs, including $14 million for 45 proposals for extra and additional design services, and payback for costs that contractors incurred because utilities weren’t moved on time. MetroLink’s 8-mile light rail extension project, which began in May last year, is the agency’s most ambitious project since 2001. The new extension, which is being paid for entirely with local taxpayer money, is one of the most expensive public construction works in the region. By the end of week, Metro officials say they expect to have 16 engineers, two design firms and a program management oversight consultant who will take over the project and work directly for the transit agency. St. Louis County Councilman Kurt Odenwald, R-Shrewsbury, whose district the extension will run through, said he wants to meet this week with Metro officials. “I am very concerned with regard to the progress of the project,” he said. “I will be wanting to meet with Metro officials for them to outline to me their plan for completing this project on time and within budget.”

Orange Line backers hope stall ends today San Gabriel Valley Tribune (San Gabriel Valley, CA) August 11, 2004 Successful so far in court on a narrow legal point, members of the residents group fighting the Orange Line have waged a broad attack on the busway, which they say will be unsafe, cause traffic tie-ups and provide little transit punch for the $330 million investment. The state Court of Appeal agreed on one key issue, halting construction because the Metropolitan Transportation Authority failed to fully study an alternative system of Rapid buses that would operate throughout the San Fernando Valley. The court could decide as early as today to end the temporary shutdown while the MTA conducts a new study. Even so, the Citizens Organized for Smart Transit or COST group has found little support among political and civic leaders or in the court of public opinion, where there has been mostly outrage over the work stoppage after years of debate. “All I’ve said from the beginning is do an honest analysis of the system of Rapid buses as compared to the busway. Make it honest and true, and we’ll see where we stand,” said Diana Lipari, chairwoman of COST, whose lawsuit led to the construction shutdown. “If the MTA had listened to the public 3.5 years ago, we wouldn’t be in this position. . They will never sit down and talk to us. All they can do is stand up there and say, NIMBY, NIMBY, NIMBY.” Scheduled to open next summer, the 14-mile, buses-only route runs along an old rail corridor between North Hollywood and Warner Center. On Tuesday, the City Council and the county Board of Supervisors joined in what has been a drumbeat from business and civic leaders urging the Orange Line’s quick completion. “The Valley has waited long enough for this project,” Mayor James Hahn’s transportation deputy, Bryan Williams, said. The temporary shutdown is costing taxpayers an estimated $70,000 a day, and a permanent shutdown until the study is completed could cost up to $100 million and set the opening back two years. So far, 120 jobs have been lost. “It’s been a long haul, but we’ve all bought into [the busway],” said Councilwoman Wendy Greuel, whose district includes the core of the opposition group. “We need this transportation link. It’s critically important. MTA officials said they never considered the Rapid bus alternative because the new, red buses had only been launched as a pilot program in 2000 when the busway’s environmental review was under way. Besides, they say, Rapid buses, no matter how speedy, will never be as fast as the Orange Line buses in bus-only lanes where they don’t have to fight traffic. COST maintains that running Rapid buses along streets such as Victory Boulevard would be just as fast as the Orange Line and serve more people at a cost of $195,000 per mile less. The MTA initially estimated that a 28-minute cross-Valley trip would lead to 24,700 average weekday boardings by 2020. But now, in estimates for a slower, 40-minute trip, that figure has been revised down to 18,700. The court agreed that the MTA didn’t look at the time savings that could come from multiple east-west routes across the Valley. “Rather than putting all of your eggs in one basket having one higher-speed guideway on one side of the Valley a better investment, a better transportation system, is to have two, three, four we don’t know the number lines evenly spaced,” said Tom Rubin, the former transit official who now works as a paid consultant for the MTA’s labor unions and the Bus Riders Union. He is advising COST for free. Safety is another concern. Opponents say Orange Line buses zipping through intersections at 45 mph and motorists turning into the path of oncoming buses would lead to crashes. For safety, officials redesigned 31 intersections, adding turn arrows, flashing lights and other features. “If everyone follows the rules and stops at the red lights, there shouldn’t be a problem with buses zipping through,” said Sean Skehan, the project manager for the city’s Department of Transportation. COST also worries about north-south traffic tie-ups as Orange Line buses get the priority through signals, but city transportation officials say buses get priority only every other time to keep traffic flowing. Bus riders have said that unless the MTA beefs up service on connecting bus lines, riders could wind up waiting for buses that in some cases now run only every hour. “This is the transfer problem,” Genevieve Giuliano, a University of Southern California professor and transportation expert, wrote in an e-mail. “Connectors running at much slower [frequencies] slow everyone down.” Still, public transit advocates even those who initially opposed it now welcome the Orange Line with a system of feeder connections. “On streets like Victory, you’re subject to all sorts of traffic delays,” said Bart Reed, executive director of The Transit Coalition. “That’s what makes rail attractive, what makes the busway attractive: consistency of service.” Still, Lipari, who refuses to disclose where COST gets its money, insists that the MTA could change course: “Just because a decision has been made doesn’t mean you just live with the decision and swallow hard.”

RAPID-TRANSIT SHOCKER; WILL COST $24.5M MORE THAN MURRAY SAID: KATZ Winnipeg Sun (Manitoba, Canada) August 11, 2004 The cost of the first leg of the proposed rapid transit system will be $24.5 million higher than Winnipeggers have been led to believe, says Mayor Sam Katz. Katz said he was surprised to learn yesterday the bus rapid transit (BRT) project will cost $75 million instead of the $50.5 million announced by then-mayor Glen Murray last spring. Murray didn’t include the cost of buses — estimated at $1 million each — when he proposed the project, Katz said. “I was rather surprised to hear that buses weren’t included in this cost. It’s like saying you’re building a house but only a basement, and not building anything on top of that,” Katz told The Sun. “That doesn’t make any sense.” However, no decision will be made on whether to continue with the project until city council begins budget deliberations in the fall, he said. The first leg of the rapid transit system will run 3.5-kilometres from south Main Street to the corner of Pembina Highway and Jubilee Avenue. The cost is to be shared by the city, the province and Ottawa. FUEL-EFFICIENT HYBRIDS Some of it will be on existing roads and some will be on specially built roads to be used only by the new high-tech buses. Those buses are expected to be fuel-efficient hybrids. Katz’s surprise at learning the cost of buses was separate raised eyebrows among its supporters, who say it had been well publicized. Coun. Jenny Gerbasi, a BRT backer, said Winnipeg Transit is applying for separate funding from Ottawa to purchase the coaches. “I don’t know why he’s saying it’s going to cost a whole bunch more, because it isn’t,” said Gerbasi (Fort Rouge-East Fort Garry). Before the new buses roll, the city would set up Main Street lanes for BRT, upgrade transit stops and put “high-tech stuff” into all of Transit’s 535 regular buses used now, said Bill Menzies, Winnipeg Transit’s planning manager. That would include a global positioning system for real-time scheduling and next-stop displays, he said. “There’s a very high benefit-to-cost ratio for that,” Menzies explained. “We should build this now — that’s what I’m saying.” Coun. Donald Benham, another staunch BRT supporter, said the project must go ahead as part of Winnipeg’s duty to be environmentally responsible and improve transportation overall. He said regular buses could be used on the system if the purchase of the expensive vehicles is delayed. “It won’t look sexy and do nearly as much to attract new riders, but we can do that,” said Benham (River Heights-Fort Garry). “But it would be a good idea to buy new buses to make the system look sleek and modern to potential riders.”

Modern, ancient Greece on display at Olympics Gannett News Service August 11, 2004 ATHENS — Tried to figure out the Athens subway system Wednesday. It was all Greek to me. (That cliche sees daylight only once. Promise). But such is the curious sensation of Athens. One moment you’re trying to figure out whether to take the purple line to Doukissis Plakentias or the red line to Agios Atonios, the next you’re inspecting Athena’s statue from 480 B.C. As these Olympic Summer Games begin, it is Athens’ split personality that is their fundamental theme. Not a swimmer or a sprinter or a drug test or an AWACS plane. But a city, trying to marry the old with the new, the dusty past with the glittering and dangerous present. It takes only a day to understand that Athens of 2004 is one big billion-dollar juxtaposition. There has never been an Olympiad like it. A modern subway train rumbles right past the ruins of the ancient market square of Agora, where Aristotle and Plato once held court. Up the street from the Hephaisteion, a remarkably preserved temple built 449 years before the birth of Christ, is a bustling McDonald’s. And a street stand that sells knives, machetes, guns and handcuffs. Standing atop the Acropolis, with teeming Athens spread below in the afternoon heat, one hears silence. Except for the police helicopters overhead. You can look down on the remains of the temple of Zeus. And also wealthy yachts in the harbor. And building after building, for Athens has less green space per capita than any capital in Europe. The Olympic visitors flock by antiquity. A guy wearing a Yankee cap steps inside the ropes to pose for a picture. One of the security men blows his whistle, in the way a lifeguard tells a kid to stop running on the pool deck. And a short walk down the hill from the Parthenon brings you to a concession stand where a cup of frozen lemonade goes for about $5.60. Nothing ancient about that at all. The Olympic torch Wednesday went through the town of Metamorphoses, which long ago gave the world the word for change. By Friday, the flame will be in a city with a new freeway that goes by a Holiday Inn. “We are writing a new chapter in Olympics history,” Athens Olympic Committee President Gianna Angelopoulos-Daskalaki was saying Wednesday. “We wanted to show the world a modern Greece. We believe that we are already doing that. … But we also wanted to make a connection with ancient Greece.” We call Gettysburg an historical treasure, from a battle 141 years ago. The Agora was destroyed five times over a thousand years by five different invaders, from the Persians to the Romans to the Visigoths, each time rebuilt, so you get old ruins upon even older ruins. But just across the street is a restaurant with a big plasma-screen television, and ostrich on the menu. A souvenir shirt has a picture of “The 11 Gods.” But they are not Poseidon and Ares, but rather the men’s soccer team that won the European championship. Athens is forever serving up surprises. Ride down the street and there is statue after statue of one god after another. And then suddenly, there’s Harry Truman. Harry Truman? Greece was rebuilt with his Marshall Plan after World War II. The Greeks honored him like they honored Socrates. Then there are the dogs. Athens apparently has long been the choice of residence of every stray in southern Europe. Officials apparently started rounding them up some months ago — prompting concern from animal rights’ groups and a headline this week in one of the local papers: “Where have all the dogs gone?” I can report that there are several survivors from the purge. Eleven of them were barking at one another Wednesday at Syntagma Square, which is in the center of the city. That’s Athens. Cruise ships borrowed to house VIPs, and stray dogs in the street. It took modern Greece seven years to get ready for the Olympic Games. It took the ancients nine years to build the Parthenon. Now both share center stage, in a city and an Olympiad that carry across millenniums, like a supernatural discus throw. Incidentally, know what the Greeks say when they’re confused? “It’s all Chinese to me.” I don’t know what the Chinese say. We can find that out when the Olympics go to Beijing in 2008.

Madrid orders Citadis Light Rail Transit Association 11 August 2004 Mintra (Madrid, Infraestructuras del Transporte), the public company responsible for transport infrastructure in the Spanish capital, has chosen ALSTOM to build 70 CITADIS vehicles for the city’s new light rail network. The contract, worth 144.6 million euros, is expected to be finalised in September. The vehicles will be built at ALSTOMs facilities in Spain and delivery is expected to start in 2006. They are required for two new light rail projects, costing EUR 345.3 million, to the north and west of the city planned to open in 2007. The first of these will be a two-line system starting at the line 10 metro station Colonia Jardin and running north to Pozuelo de Alarcón and west to Boadilla del Monte (total 13.8 km). This could be extended to create a 10- km link between Pozuelo and the suburban rail station Aravaca. The second project is a 5.3-km line between Plaza de Castilla and Las Tblas and Sanchinarro.

Metro to look at rail options; DeLay praises new study of different ways to expand system Houston Chronicle Aug. 12, 2004 IRVING - Metro will announce this morning that it plans to hold a forum in October to examine alternative ways to expand its new light rail system, drawing praise from longtime congressional nemesis Tom DeLay. Delay, a Sugar Land Republican and the U.S. House majority leader, is the keynote breakfast speaker today at the Texas Transportation Summit in Irving, a Dallas suburb. George DeMontrond, a Metropolitan Transit Authority board member, will introduce DeLay to the more than 1,000 conference attendees and announce the rail seminar. “Our goal is to take a look at the potential new technology that’s out there, to see which is viable, which we can use to build Houston a first-class, 21st century, high-technology transportation system,” DeMontrond said in an interview Thursday. “Tom DeLay has encouraged us to look at all the technologies that are available and has offered his support in helping us if we find one that’s worthy of a trial.” According to a copy of DeLay’s speech provided by his office, the congressman will praise Metro’s new leadership for its work reviewing problems along the 7 1/2 -mile Main Street light rail line that opened Jan. 1. While ridership continues to grow every month, MetroRail trains have been involved in 50 collisions with vehicles and pedestrians this year. This has prompted discussion among Metro’s new board and president about taking a second look at a voter-approved expansion plan calling for 65 additional miles of mostly street-level light rail by 2025. “Metro, as you may know, has encountered a few rough patches in its first year, and I want to commend its new leadership for not making excuses about those difficulties,” DeLay plans to tell the summit this morning. Subway is one alternative Among other things, officials have said they now are evaluating a downtown subway as an alternative to street-level rail for one downtown MetroRail extension. “We’re looking at some very flexible demand-responsive technologies,” said Metro President and CEO Frank Wilson. One example he cited is an airport-style “people mover” system that could carry smaller numbers of passengers over relatively short distances without interfering with street traffic. DeLay in recent years wrote language into congressional appropriations bills prohibiting federal funding for the Main Street MetroRail line. On nearly every other light rail project in the United States, the Federal Transit Administration has covered at least half the cost. DeLay also put up obstacles in the early 1990s to a Metro monorail plan. Courting DeLay Both times DeLay argued the rail lines were a waste of federal dollars because they would cost too much and do too little to reduce traffic congestion. He also objected to the lack of a public vote on the specific plans Metro was proposing. Wilson and Metro Chairman David Wolff, who both took office earlier this year, made a pilgrimage to Washington in June along with DeMontrond to seek DeLay’s support for obtaining federal transit grants to help pay for the MetroRail expansion voters authorized in November. “His support, as well as that of our entire congressional delegation, is extremely important to providing us the resources necessary to build our system,” DeMontrond said Thursday evening after seeing DeLay’s prepared remarks. Another critic speaks out While the transit authority’s relationship with DeLay appears to be warming, another of Metro’s congressional critics offered his strongest comments yet against rail. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, suggested during a Thursday discussion with other Texas representatives at the Irving summit that the quickest way to reduce the highway funding shortfall would be to abolish federal assistance for mass-transit projects. One of the major themes of this year’s Texas Transportation Summit is what to do about road needs that are far outpacing the government’s ability to pay for them. Culberson said revenues from the federal gasoline tax should be limited to the Highway Trust Fund. A portion of the tax drivers pay at the pump now goes to the Federal Transit Administration. Opposing federal subsidies “Transit is taking 11 percent of the money but they don’t contribute a nickel,” Culberson said. “It’s carrying less than 1 percent of the traffic. I’m afraid rail in Houston is going to be a white elephant and a boat anchor around the neck of taxpayers.” Though Culberson spoke out vigorously last year against Metro’s rail referendum, his comments about ending federal subsidies for mass transit appeared to surprise other panelists and many in the audience. “If Houston wants to give us a little more of that transit money for Dallas, we’d be glad to take it,” said Rep. Martin Frost, D-Dallas, who earlier had alluded to the fact that Dallas got ahead in building light rail because of Houston’s failed past plans.

Rail-line’s price stuns council Deseret Morning News (Salt Lake City) August 12, 2004 The price tag for Salt Lake City’s portion of Utah’s newest — and smallest — light-rail extension hit some City Council members like a ton of bricks this week. Council members realized Tuesday that Mayor Rocky Anderson’s administration wants taxpayers to spend $8.5 million for a TRAX extension between the Delta Center and the Intermodal Hub, near 300 South and 600 West, now under construction. All told, federal, state and city taxpayers will pay nearly $35 million for the line, which covers five blocks. That’s $7 million a block, slightly less than the per-block costs of the 400 South TRAX line and the University of Utah Medical Center line. City Council members are wondering if it’s worth it and whether the city should be paying more for the line than the Utah Transit Authority is paying — $5.2 million — the money left over from the medical center line for the extension. “That’s the first time somebody’s hit me with an $8.5 million price tag for something which quite frankly I’m not sure how many of our residents are going to use,” Councilman Carlton Christensen said. Christensen said many city businesses would benefit from the line but, “It’s such a huge price tag I want to make sure we’re not unfairly picking up costs that may be someone else’s.” Federal money is expected to cover roughly $20 million of the project. In the past, the Utah Transit Authority had paid for most, if not all, the road reconstruction costs associated with TRAX installation. Now, however, because UTA has so many light-rail projects in the works, they are unwilling to pay for road reconstruction or utility removal, leaving those costs for the city, UTA spokesman Justin Jones and DJ Baxter, Anderson’s senior adviser, said. “We need to spend less, and I think we can spend less,” Councilman Dave Buhler said. But Baxter said the price is pretty much set. “Again what we are talking about is the cost of street improvements, so they cost what they cost,” he said. Baxter and several City Council members wondered if UTA could pay more, noting that UTA needs the line a lot more than Salt Lake City does. “I would have to say this little leg is probably more important for their whole transportation system to connect those lines together than they allude to in public,” Christensen said. But Jones said it’s the city that wants the line so bad, not UTA. “It’s not part of the Wasatch Front Regional Council’s priority list,” he said. If the light-rail connection between the Delta Center and the Intermodal hub were not built, UTA would have to use shuttle buses to ferry Davis and Weber County commuter-rail passengers from the Intermodal Hub to the light rail line, Jones said. UTA is willing to build the line without doing street improvements, thus saving the city most or all of its $8.5 million, Jones said. Anderson’s administration is asking the council to allocate $1 million from its capitol improvement budget for the project this year and then $1.75 million for 2005 and 2006. Also the administration wants $4 million from the Redevelopment Agency, some of which has already been allocated. The goal, Baxter said, is to spread the cost out over a few years so the city doesn’t take such a large hit at once. Baxter notes that part of the street improvement costs, along 200 South, are scheduled to be done anyway so the city is just moving the project up to coincide with light-rail construction. Also, the city needs to move sewer and water utilities from underneath the potential TRAX lines so they can be accessed in the future. The council will likely decide whether it will approve the initial $1 million funding request August 24. If the council denies the request, Baxter said the administration will likely return with a larger request next year. E-mail: bsnyder@desnews.com

Metro hires staff from companies it fired St. Louis Post-Dispatch August 13, 2004 The Metro transit agency may have lost confidence in the four businesses running its $550 million light-rail extension project, but that didn’t stop it from hiring away key players from those companies for its own in-house staff. Metro this week fired and then sued the companies that formed the Cross County Collaborative, which was overseeing the design and construction of the 8-mile extension from Forest Park to Clayton and Shrewsbury. Richard Hardcastle, the collaborative’s lawyer, said Friday that Metro had made job offers to “a number of employees” of the companies that make up the collaborative, “and that at least some of the employees have accepted positions with Metro.” Tony Thompson, president and chief executive for Kwame Building Group Inc., which was one of the four businesses that formed the collaborative, said Friday that Metro had made offers to six of his 12 key employees who worked on the project. “It’s like a dagger through the heart,” Thompson said of losing part of his staff. “Some of these employees were my treasured people, but their family’s livelihood is bigger than the Kwame Building Group.” On Tuesday, Metro fired the collaborative, which is also made up of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade and Douglas Inc.; Jacobs Civil Inc.; and STV Inc. Later that day, employees started getting job offers. Metro officials say those employees contacted the transit agency about jobs. “People responded to the ads that were run in the paper,” Metro spokeswoman Adella Jones said. Although Thompson regrets losing staff members, he said Metro’s interest in them showed that the agency approved of their work. “They may have lost confidence in the leadership, but the people on the ground getting it done clearly had the right stuff,” he said. Jones said the staffers were hired based on their qualifications and that Metro’s concerns were with management. On Wednesday, the transit agency sued the group, claiming it cost Metro millions of dollars and a year’s worth of delays on the project. Metro initially hired the group in May 2000 for $40.75 million and has paid the group about $47 million because of unexpected additional costs. Project construction began in May of last year. Metro will now manage the massive public works project. The extension is now expected to open in the summer or fall 2006.

Norfolk Southern rejects offer for light rail right-of-way The Virginian-Pilot August 13, 2004 Plans to bring light rail to Norfolk suffered a blow Thursday when Norfolk Southern Corp. ended negotiations to sell its Norfolk-Virginia Beach rail corridor to Hampton Roads Transit, saying the agency’s offer was too low to be taken seriously. The development could derail HRT’s proposal for a “starter” light rail line in Norfolk. More than half of the proposed route follows the Norfolk Southern freight line. The setback also could scuttle any chance of a future extension of the Norfolk line into Virginia Beach, as well as that city’s interest in potentially using the corridor for express buses. HRT, negotiating on behalf of Norfolk and Virginia Beach, offered $2.7 million for the 15.4 -mile right-of-way. The land recently was appraised at $48.4 million. H. Craig Lewis , Norfolk Southern’s vice president for corporate affairs, said the railroad doesn’t consider it a serious offer, adding that HRT’s handling of the negotiations is “befuddling.” “I’ve never encountered anything like this,” said Lewis, who has been involved in dozens of transactions between the railroad and transit agencies. “We can’t give you a donation of $45 million ,” Lewis said, referring to HRT. Michael S. Townes, HRT’s president and CEO, said in a statement, “Public airing of negotiations by Norfolk Southern is nothing but an attempt to extract a value beyond reason in a community that Norfolk Southern calls home.” Townes said HRT’s offer is “fair and reasonable” and “responsible to the citizens and taxpayers of our region.” He said Norfolk Southern’s asking price “is not consistent with the real value of the rail line.” Although Lewis compared the status of the negotiations to an obituary, Townes does not think the issue is dead. He said HRT plans to continue discussions with the railroad but “will not be conducting negotiations with Norfolk Southern via the media and has no further comment.” Lewis provided examples of recent sales of its rail lines for other transit projects. In the late 1990s , it sold 32 miles in New Jersey for $67.5 million . In December, 3 miles in Charlotte went for $14.75 million. The railroad is currently discussing selling 1.7 miles in Pennsylvania for $4.5 million. “We want a fair price,” Lewis said. Norfolk Southern is a business that must look after its shareholders and asset values, he said, adding that selling the property far below value would set a bad precedent. But HRT is basing its offer, in part, on another transaction � a 1997 sale of 1.14 miles of railroad corridor near the resort area to Virginia Beach for $255,000. That was about $224,000 per mile. HRT’s current offer is about $175,000 per mile, which the transit agency said is fair because the property under negotiation is not as valuable. Lewis, however, characterized the earlier Virginia Beach sale as “a substantial charitable contribution” because the assessed value was $760,000 . “It’s a classic example of no good deed ever goes unpunished,” Lewis said. Two appraisals have been conducted on the corridor property. HRT paid for the initial one in February 2000 that came in at $38.6 million. Norfolk Southern paid for an updated one a year ago that valued the property at $48.4 million. HRT said its offer is substantially lower than the appraisals because of the property’s size, shape, easements and other encumbrances. For example, Dominion Virginia Power lines run much of the corridor’s length, as do some water and sewer lines. Norfolk Southern officials said they have welcomed and even encouraged HRT and the cities to condemn the property to help establish a fair price, but HRT has not chosen that route. For years, HRT has counted on using Norfolk Southern’s corridor for light rail before any numbers were put on the table. From the start, Norfolk Southern worried that HRT was making too many assumptions. In 1996 , the company criticized HRT for seeking approval from the cities on specific rail routes without engaging the railroad in discussions about the feasibility of using the rail lines. Lewis noted that in February this year � the same month that HRT made its offer of just more than 5 percent of the appraised value � the transit agency published a light rail brochure showing the route along the Norfolk Southern tracks. “We need to set the public record straight,” Lewis said. HRT’s literature makes it “appear this thing is going to happen.” Norfolk’s $198.5 million starter light rail line has not won approval from the Federal Transit Administration, a critical step for receiving federal funding. The FTA asked HRT to refine its cost-benefit analysis, which did not meet federal thresholds, before deciding whether to recommend the project. The project rated medium to medium-high on other measures such as land use, financing plan and local financial commitment. The updated proposal HRT will submit to the FTA this month sets aside $10.5 million for property acquisition. The 7.5-mile line includes 4.8 miles of Norfolk Southern track. HRT will not disclose its estimated payment to Norfolk Southern. “Nothing will ever succeed unless both parties are winners,” Lewis sa