Transportation Forum L.A., Jan. 21, 1997

Public Hearing on the Regional Transportation Plan, January 21, 1997, Los Angeles
Notes by Jim Stewart, SCCED

Councilmember Nate Holden: With a 40% population increase, by 2020 we'll all be living in the inner city -- let's hope we'll have a subway system by then.

SCAG has done a good planning job. We require developers to share the additional costs of transportation improvements.

We need to get more public input into the transportation plan. We need to get flyers to churches, senior centers, high schools, colleges, businesses and block clubs. We need to go where the people are. We could hold school assemblies on input into the plan. We could meet at the Hughes Aircraft cafeteria. We also need the brochure in Spanish. We need a questionnaire that they can check off.

I hope you include the needs of the disabled in the plan, we need dial-a-ride for them.

Jerry Jaffe: The RAC is composed of private citizens from the private sector and non-profits to provide input into the SCAG process. We will work with the Valley Industry and Commerce Association (VICA) and other groups to get more input into the transportation plan.

Clint Rosemond, SCAG: SCAG was created in 1965 through a joint powers agreement (JPA) involving 7 counties and 84 cities. Now it includes 6 counties and 184 cities and over 38,000 sq. miles. SCAG is advisory only, it is not another unit of government.

Pat Michell, SCAG: we are working now on the draft for the RTP and expect the SCAG Regional Council to adopt it in July or August. We have worked with our 14 subregions. We gave them some data and got from them a list of their ideas and policy recommendations. We have created and sent them detailed transportation models for the subregions.

We have produced about 10 alternatives. The final plan must describe how the billions in transportation funds over the next 23 years must be spent in accordance with a regional plan, in which the cities and counties all work together appropriately. The plan looks at overall regional issues, not at whether a specific intersection needs a traffic light.

SCAG has created an overall set of goals and specific goals for transportation. The first goal is to support the economic vitality of the region. So we are especially concerned that congestion can slow the movement of trucks and affect our competitiveness. So we are concerned with congestion on both freeways and local streets. One of our recommendations is to consider automated traffic lights to speed traffic on local streets.

The SCAG plan will also have an EIR, since we have to show improvement in air quality. However, so far our plan does not meet air quality standards by 2020.

We must do a RTP every three years. We have sophisticated analytic tools as well as a set of performance indicators to uate our plan. The indicators include:

• Accessibility - the best is within a short walk, a mixed use livable community means people have ready access to most everything they need, plus easy access to mass transit to go elsewhere.

• Cost-effectiveness - means we get maximum benefit and efficiency for every dollar spent.

Public: We should build the Exposition light rail line. The Right of Way is already owned by the MTA and there are many people living and working along that line. It also parallels the busy I-10 freeway.

Michell: The SCAG plan recommends a light rail line down that general corridor, but it is not our role to recommend a specific route, the MTA does that.

Michell: Our plan will call for $200 million for a demonstration of a Smart Shuttle system.

Public: The SCAG plan is useless, since it does not appear to propose a mass transit system that will work for the majority of the people of the region.

Public: How will make a final decision? Will you consider public input? For example, if 80% of your public comments support more light rail, but your Regional Council wants more highways, what will happen?

Public: Our population growth is artificially stimulated by communities and developers.

Michell: Our projections show over 80% of the increase is natural births over deaths, and only 15% from immigration.

Public: We need to look from a global perspective, and chart out where our food, water and jobs are going to come from. We need to build a sustainable city, including growing food on rooftops.

Public: Urban sprawl destroys the environment. We need to look at the costs of power, water, electricity, and transportation to support sprawl. Don't build more roads to Temecula or people will move out there.

Public: The public is paying tax dollars to support your planning efforts. If this is a sham hearing, just for show, then I will tell my Congressman not to send any dollars in support of this plan.

Public: We have a transportation problem because people don't live where they work, so the solution is to increase the possibilities for people to work in their residential communities, perhaps in home offices, home businesses and using the electronic highways. Cities try to bring in more businesses to provide jobs to their communities, but home businesses may be the way to go.

Public: We need buses on every major street, with light rail lines about every mile, and perhaps Metro-link or subway every 5-10 miles apart, with all three working synergistically.

Public: We need to use car pools and van pools, but we should have air purifiers in the vans to protect against the spread of communicable diseases.

Public: In 1972 I recommended every public facility have safe locked bicycle racks, but it hasn't happened. Now I recommend every major employer also have bike racks and also shower and locker facilities for bicyclists.

Public: There were many innovative transportation solutions presented at the UN Conference on Human Settlements in Istanbul last June. You ought to look at them.

Public: The driving forces in our society are the market (businesses create the desire for something and fill it) and the people. The people need to be organized. Many people together have more clout than one person.

Public: Has SCAG asked the oil companies if they're planning to invest in transportation alternatives, such as jitneys?

Rosemond: The oil companies won't do it unless there is big public interest, with market implications.

Public: I work out of my home 3 days a week. Let's have more creative ideas for alternative uses of our home, so we can have access to work, without the need for transportation.

Michell: I have a $15,000 grant for educating kids on the hidden costs of driving an auto. It is now being tested in high schools. ISTEA encourages us to use alternative approaches to move people or work.

Public: Why can we still get federal funding when we are not meeting air quality standards?