Transit Plan Risks Robbing Region of Funds

Southern California’s long-range transportation plan may violate clean-air laws, a problem that jeopardizes billions in public funds for highway and other projects.

The Federal Highway Administration, Caltrans, California Air Resources Board and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have put regional planners on notice that there are serious flaws in the recently adopted plan.

One problem cited repeatedly in formal letters to the Southern California Assn. of Governments is the planning agency’s assumption that a zero-emission, high-speed monorail will be built in Los Angeles by 2010.

The proposed 92-mile “maglev” train system, so named because it would be powered by a magnetic levitation system capable of generating speeds of more than 200 mph, is a problem because it is being counted on to mitigate the damage from other transportation projects.

For every driver whom planners can show they are putting in the train--even if only on paper--the planning agency gets credits for meeting clean-air laws.

But regulatory agencies with a mandate to clean up the air over Los Angeles, considered among the dirtiest in the nation, are crying foul.

The problem? At this point, the proposed train lacks financing, proven technology or even evidence that it might be feasible for Southern California.

“It is not advisable to believe that the maglev will provide air quality or mobility improvements in the time frame suggested,” Sandra A. Balmir of the Federal Highway Administration wrote in a letter to the planning agency.

Federal agencies require that long-range transit plans meet Clean Air Act requirements by balancing projects that will generate pollution, such as freeway construction, with environmentally friendly projects that mitigate the damage to air quality.

The federal highway and transit administrations have until June to approve the plan.

If the regional plan fails to meet its requirements, $1.9 billion in highway funds scheduled to flow into the region to relieve congested highways and freeways would be blocked.

Only a limited number of projects would be allowed to go forward, such as mass-transit projects considered to have immediate air quality benefits. Other projects allowed would be those needed for safety reasons or that have environmental clearance and are under construction.

Orange County Project Could Be Affected Too

Among the projects threatened immediately would be carpool-lane projects on the San Diego Freeway in Los Angeles County and the Garden Grove Freeway in Orange County.

Each successive year the plan is deemed out of conformity, the list of projects losing funding would grow.

Discussions are underway between the regulatory agencies and the regional planners to correct the perceived deficiencies in the long-range plan.

But at this point, the two sides appear far apart.

Mark Pisano, director of the planning agency, continues to insist that the plan for the $7-billion high-tech train is feasible.

Pisano said he believes there is enough support for the project to raise the $7 billion for construction costs through a public-private corporation, although it still has not been created. He said the agency--some form of joint-powers authority that would include governments along the proposed line--would raise money through revenue bonds and rely heavily on private investment.

Pisano said questions being raised about the maglev are similar to those he and other planners heard in the late 1980s when they first began talking about the Alameda Corridor, a multibillion-dollar project now under construction.

“This organization developed the idea of the Alameda Corridor. At that time, we had no financing program. It took us five years to put together a financing plan. We learned a lot,” Pisano said.

The elevated train, similar in style to Disneyland’s monorail, would run along the Santa Monica and San Bernardino freeways. The proposed main line would connect transportation hubs at Los Angeles International Airport, Union Station, Ontario International Airport and airports being developed in Riverside and San Bernardino counties. A secondary line could run from LAX to Palmdale.

Interest in the maglev, Pisano said, dates back to the late 1980s and early 1990s, when a plan called Project California was discussed by local aerospace companies to stimulate new investment in the region while developing an industry around the new high-technology transportation system.

The idea was moved along when the Federal Railway Administration chose Pisano’s agency as one of seven in the nation to produce a plan for a transit system using maglev technology.

The local planning agency, however, did not make the final cut when the seven states receiving the early seed money were narrowed to two. Only Maryland and Pennsylvania were selected to receive federal funding for further development of a high-speed line. Next year, one of those two states will be chosen for a pilot project.

Federal regulatory officials, watching the competition for maglev money, figured local planners would drop their plan after they lost the national competition.

The highway administration’s Balmir said “it is just not reasonable” to think a maglev monorail can be built within 10 years.

Among the problems, she said, is that “there is no secure funding for it.” She added that the kind of public-private partnership envisioned by Pisano “is going to take some time.”

As for environmental clearances, she said it typically takes a highway project two or three years to clear the various regulatory hurdles. “Since this is a new technology,” she said, “it might take a little longer,” particularly considering California’s environmental laws.

Among others raising questions was Ken Bigos of the federal Environmental Protection Agency.

“Maglev is an uncertain technology which faces many hurdles to its future development,” Bigos said in a letter to the planning agency. “Reliance on implementing such a system in the short term seems imprudent.”

Bigos urged the planning agency to “show robust alternatives to provide those emissions reductions if maglev is not implemented.”

A staff document prepared by the state Air Resources Board said “zero-emission rail projects would certainly benefit air quality in the region.”

But the board advised that if construction of the train within 10 years “is not realistic,” the planning agency should “ensure that equivalent emission reductions will be achieved through alternative measures.”

So far, those measures have not been outlined.