|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Jul 28, 2011 8:12:28 GMT -8
It has to be done by 2015 or Metro will have to pay the State for the cost of the ROW - it was purchased using rail money. Does anyone know if either have been budgeted? Are we sure about this; or is it just heresay? Metro approved the Long Range Transportation Plan in 2010 and there is no mention of converting the Orange Line to rail. A project that will take 2 years at least. This could not have "slipped" by Metro, somebody would have said something. Also, Measure R didn't allocate any money to the Orange Line conversion. If so, people would be talking about his conversion NOW and stop complaining its a bus line instead of a rail line. So, are we 100% sure it has to be converted? Metro is not dumb. They would have allocated money in Measure R in order to meet a legal requirement.
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Jul 28, 2011 9:10:43 GMT -8
From The San Fernando Valley Transit Insider (link):
The LACTC purchased the Burbank-Chandler right-of-way from the Southern Pacific Transportation Company on March 12, 1991. $44.8 million of the purchase funding came from the California Transportation Commission (CTC) in the form of Proposition 108 (the Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act of 1990) funds. Proposition 108 provided for a bond issue to fund rail transit programs. It created a new section (2701) of the Streets and Highways Code covering the issuance of the bonds and the use of the funds created by those bond issues. Specifically, §2701.06 reads: The money in the fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, shall be available, without regard to fiscal years, for acquisition of rights-of-way, capital expenditures, and acquisition of rolling stock for intercity rail, passenger rail, and urban rail transit and for capital improvements which directly support rail transportation, including exclusive busways which are converted within 10 years after completion of construction into rail lines, grade separations to enhance rail passenger service, and multimodal terminals.
Among the corridors identified in §2701.07 is the "San Fernando Valley extension" of Metro Rail (separate from the segment from Wilshire/Alvarado to Lankershim/Chandler). The California Transportation Commission approved that funding as Resolution No. BFP-91-18, which was formally executed on April 10, 1992 to cover a portion of the funds LACTC had used to purchase the right-of-way from Southern Pacific. §2.4 of that resolution reads, in part: (The) CTC shall be entitled to a then-present value refund, or credit, at State's option, equivalent to the proportionate funding participation by the State and other public funds toward property acquisition and project construction in the event that the LACTC, or (Metrolink), or their constituent members, or successor public entities, cease to utilize this project for the intended public passenger rail purposes. This obligation was acknowledged by then-CEO Franklin White in his October 21, 1994 memo to the MTA board of directors in which he responded to questions raised at the October 13 Planning and Programming Committee meeting: Question: Does the MTA incur any financial loss if it does not build a rail project along this line?
Response: MTA ... has an obligation to pay the State of California $44.8 million in the event that it does not proceed with a passenger rail project on the SP right-of-way, unless CTC agrees to waive such repayment. As of the end of 2007, the "then-present value" of the original $44.8 million was $67.4 million; if the inflation rate remains approximately the same, by October 30, 2015 (the tenth anniversary of the Orange Line beginning passenger service) it will be $83.1 million. While no one can say for certain whether or not the CTC would waive the repayment (which would presumably come due on that date, based on the Prop 108 language), the state's budget problems in the intervening years seems to predict that they would. In January, 2001, the CTC allocated $12.3 million in Traffic Congestion Relief Program funding for the San Fernando Valley East-West Bus Rapid Transit Project. However, the allocation documentation -- Resolution No. TA-01-01 -- did not waive the repayment of the Proposition 108 funds, and the EIR makes no provision for an upgrade to rail that would conform with the "Robbins Bill".
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Jul 28, 2011 9:26:31 GMT -8
A little after hump day break:
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jul 28, 2011 14:38:41 GMT -8
The fact that they are extending the busway leads me to believe that Metro either has already received or believes it will receive the CTC waiver.
|
|