THE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL HIGH-SPEED RAIL IN ORANGE COUNTY AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WHITE PAPER THE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL HIGH-SPEED RAIL IN ORANGE COUNTY AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WHITE PAPER
i. Preface 1 Introduction and Background 1.1 Background 1.2 Purpose of Conference 2 Conference Summary 2.1 Welcome and Opening Remarks 2.1.1 Sarah L. Catz, Director, Center for Urban Infrastructure 2.1.2 Gary Brahm, Chancellor of Brandman University 2.1.3 Curt Pringle, Mayor of Anaheim and Chair, California High-Speed Rail Authority 2.2 Global Positioning: High-Speed Rail Around the Globe 2.2.1 Tom Downs, Chair, Rail Division, Veolia Transportation 2.3 Benefits of High-Speed Rail 2.3.1 Sarah L. Catz, Director, Center for Urban Infrastructure 2.4 How Do We Pay For High-Speed Rail? Moderator, John Haussmann, VP and Principal Manager, HDR 2.4.1 Do Public-Private Partnerships Make Sense? Mike Schneider, Managing Partner, InfraConsult 2.4.2 Foreign Investors: Kent Carl, President, Triarm International, Inc. 2.5 Federal Strategy 2.5.1 Loretta Sanchez, U.S. Representative, 47th District 2.6 Getting Connected: Defining an Effective Intermodal Strategy 2.6.1 Peter Buffa, Member, Board of Directors, Orange County Transportation Authority 2.6.2 Richard Flierl, Principal, Cooper Carry 2.6.3 Emile Haddad, President and CEO, FivePoint Communities 2.6.4 Art Leahy, CEO, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2.6.5 Will Kempton, CEO, Orange County Transportation Authority 2.6.6 Larry Agran, Mayor Pro Tem, City of Irvine 2.7 What are the Solutions 2.7.1 Tom Umberg, Vice Chair, California High-Speed Rail Authority 2.7.1.1 Participated Discussion 3 Online Survey 3.1 Survey Overview 3.2 Survey Data 4 Appendices 4.1 Speaker Bios 4.2 Proposed California High-Speed Rail Lines PREFACE4.3
Thinking Ahead: High-Speed Rail in Southern California, a report released in August by the Center for Urban Infrastructure, showcased the benefits of a fast, convenient, and efficient intercity high-speed rail system on southern California’s economy. The study was presented to a conference entitled, “The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California”. More than 100 government, business and civic leaders from Orange County and southern California attended the invitation only conference held at Brandman University in Irvine on August 26, 2010. The conference was sponsored by the Orange County Transportation Association, Veolia Transportation, HDR, NRG Energy West, Brandman University, and Southern California Air Quality Management District.
Conference speakers included Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle, Chairman of the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), former state Assemblyman Tom Umberg, Vice Chairman of CHSRA, Tom Downs, Chairman, Rail Division, Veolia Transportation, Art Leahy, CEO of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Will Kempton, CEO of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA); U.S. Representative Loretta Sanchez, Irvine Councilmember Larry Agran, Emile Haddad, CEO of FivePoint Communities, Mike Schneider, Managing Partner, InfraConsult, Kent Carl, President, Triarm International, John Haussmann, VP and Principal Program Manager, HDR, Richard Flierl, Principal, Cooper Carry, Peter Buffa, Member, OCTA Board of Directors, and Sarah Catz, Director, Center for Urban Infrastructure.
Following the conference, the Center for Urban Infrastructure conducted a high-speed rail survey utilizing surveymonkey.com and asking the conference invitation list to respond. Of the two hundred or so guests on the conference invitation list, 96 responded. Of those about half actually attended the August 26th Center for Urban Infrastructure Conference. The survey results are discussed at the end of this paper, but it is worth noting at this point is that the respondents felt strongly about the need to embrace private investment in the creation of a mass transit system that moves people and does so in an intelligent and economical way.
Since this conference was held several significant events have occurred: • The California High-Speed Rail Authority has selected a 66.4-mile route between Borden and Corcoran, in the California Central Valley, as the first segment to be built. o Due to the lack of population and employment centers on this segment some critics are labeling it the “train to nowhere”. o The segment offers cheaper, less complex construction challenges than other options and has good access to existing railroad right of way. . Co-Author of Thinking Ahead: High-Speed Rail in Southern California, Adam Christian, points out in his December 1, 2010 blog entry that assuming the segment from Borden to Corcoran is completed on budget it will rank as one of the lowest-cost high- speed rail projects ever built on a per mile basis.
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 3 of 36 PREFACE . Consequently, it would constitute a tremendous bang for the buck, while boosting the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s credibility as a competent steward of taxpayer dollars. o Approximately 80,000 jobs will be created in the Central Valley. • The newly elected Governors of Ohio and Wisconsin refused to accept stimulus funding from the federal government to develop their own rail lines. o This led to the federal government redirecting $624 million in economic stimulus funds to the California high-speed rail project that had been approved for Ohio and Wisconsin. • After the November 2010 elections, the House of Representatives began their new session with a Republican Majority. o The incoming chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is Representative John Mica, R-Fla., who has already signaled that high-speed rail money might be better spent in areas of the country other than in California. • California high-speed rail critics make their views known o Cities on the San Francisco Peninsula continue to try to block high-speed rail routes that travel through residential areas. o The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights in San Francisco and the Associated Professionals and Contractors have filed an administrative complaint against the California High-Speed Rail Authority, charging it with unfair contracting practices that violate federal civil rights laws. o Reports have surfaced that criticize the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s management, saying it is too small and overwhelmed by the task at hand. o Concerns have been raised in the Central Valley that valuable farm land will be destroyed to make room for railroad right of way. • General Electric Co., and CSR Corp., China’s largest maker of rail vehicles, plan to invest $50 million in their U.S. based venture for supplying passenger trains for high speed lines in both California and Florida. The next several months will continue to bring newsworthy headlines to this mega- infrastructure project and the Center for Urban Infrastructure will monitor the events and keep abreast of the California high-speed rail project and what it continues to mean for California and in particular, the southern California economy.
Following is the summary of the August 26th Center for Urban Infrastructure conference, “The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California”.
A constant dialogue on the high-speed rail project is urged and to that end, updates will be posted on www.c-u-i.org
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 4 of 36 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1.1 Background
In January 2010, President Obama announced the recipients of an unprecedented $8 billion federal stimulus grant that will jumpstart high-speed rail service on thirteen corridors across the United States. California was named the largest recipient of any state ($2.34 billion) with $2.25 billion allocated to a dedicated high-speed rail system. Federal funds will be matched by state funds from Proposition 1A and the remainder of the money will be allocated toward regional transit projects.
Excited by the potential of this investment, many political leaders are touting the myriad benefits of a fast, convenient and efficient intercity rail system, including lower carbon emissions, improved mobility, employment and economic revitalization and less dependence of foreign oil.
In the summer of 2010, the Center for Urban Infrastructure (CUI) analyzed the benefits to be realized from high-speed rail, specifically in southern California, and the strategies needed to ensure that cities around the region can take advantage of the investment about to be made in California. This analysis was included in the report, Thinking Ahead: High-Speed Rail in Southern California. This report also examined the impact high-speed rail will have on legislative initiatives that mandate a reduction in statewide greenhouse gas emissions (AB 32) and the coordination of regional land use and transportation planning (SB 375) in support of those reduction targets.
More specifically, the goals of the CUI report, were to: • Quantify some of the regional economic benefits likely to be captured by southern California transit users and adjacent communities, such as reduced greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), improved health, employment growth and increased affordable housing
• Outline principles of effective intermodal strategies to increase future ridership
• Understand the role of high-speed rail in advancing compliance with SB 375’s GHG emissions reduction targets
• Assess the effectiveness and value of regulatory incentives contained in SB 375 for use by local governments and developers to build high density, mixed-use communities near transit corridors
• Evaluate regional opportunities for transit-oriented development around high- speed rail stations in southern California
• Identify strategic land use and planning concepts helpful to future high-speed rail ridership and station (re)development
• Recommend policies that cities and public agencies can undertake to maximize high-speed rail benefits at the local and regional level
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 5 of 36 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND What we found: • During the construction phase (2012-2020), the California high-speed rail project will contribute a regional income benefit of $701 million, providing the equivalent of over 57,000 full-time, one-year jobs (or multi-year employment for approximately 15,200 workers). Construction of the Anaheim Regional Intermodal Transportation Center (ARTIC) alone will create an additional 3,500 to 5,000 jobs in Orange County (based on estimated project costs of $179 million).
• By 2035, high-speed rail will attract over 127,000 permanent jobs to southern California that would not have otherwise been created. The opportunity to locate these jobs near high-speed rail stations and other transit hubs should be encouraged through supportive zoning and additional policy incentives. The sectors in Southern California that would benefit most from this type of clustering include health care and financial and real estate services.
• The California high-speed rail system would be a major catalyst for the continued expansion of the emerging “green economy” of southern California. The green economy includes new goods and services related to energy efficiency and production, high-performance building and construction materials as well as low- emission vehicles and equipment. Seventy-seven percent of the new permanent jobs in southern California attributable to high-speed rail would be created in sectors with a high concentration of fast-growing “green” specializations.
• High-speed rail would prevent the emission of nearly half a billion pounds of CO2 annually by 2035, based on the number of auto trips diverted from the road to rail. An additional three billion pounds of CO2 would be creditable to Southern California Area Governments (SCAG) region as a net reduction in CO2 emissions under SB 375 guidelines. In Orange County alone, the annual net reduction from intra- and interregional high-speed rail trips in 2035 would total over one billion pounds, or over one-third of the SCAG total based on estimated ridership to and from the intermodal Anaheim high-speed rail station during Phase I of the California High-Speed Rail operations.
• High-speed rail commuters who ride at least four times per week would directly benefit from increased levels of physical activity from walking and/or biking for some portion of their trip.
• The cooperation of local governments in modifying zoning and land use codes will be key to implementing the Sustainable Communities Strategy element of SB 375.
• Local governments must step in with additional incentives to make high-density TOD financially viable especially for affordable housing projects, either through contributions of city-owned land or publicly-sponsored financing for associated parking or open space amenities.
• The cost of the necessary new parking required at high-speed rail and existing commuter rail stations in southern California could be partially reduced with low-
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 6 of 36 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND cost connectivity concepts that would deliver commuters to high-speed rail stations via other modes.
• Parking structures at high-speed rail stations could be designed and constructed as air rights projects with housing, retail and office uses progressively added to the structures as the market demand for transit-oriented development grows. These types of structures could help local governments recoup some or all of the capital costs of construction.
1.2 Purpose of Conference
The purpose of the conference was to discuss and exchange ideas on real solutions for increasing our mobility and planning for high-speed rail in southern California.
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 7 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY
A brief summary of the remarks of each speaker are presented in this section. 2.1 Welcome and Opening Remarks
2.1.1 Sarah L. Catz, Director, Center for Urban Infrastructure Welcome and introduction.
2.1.2 Gary Brahm, Chancellor of Brandman University Brandman University, formerly Chapman University College, is a part of the Chapman University system, and has over 11,000 students. Brandman is home to the Center for Urban Infrastructure, which hosts today’s conference. To learn more, please visit www.brandman.edu.
2.1.3 Curt Pringle, Mayor of Anaheim and Chair of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, former Speaker of the California State Assembly Some important questions to bring forth in considering high-speed rail: Can California afford such an investment? Is the technology needed for high-speed rail available? Will California need government subsidies to finance such a project?
Elsewhere in the world, high-speed rail exists in a form that is both safe and profitable. Mr. Pringle recalled his experience riding France’s high-speed rail system, the TGV (Train à Grande Vitesse). Spain, Germany, China, South Korea and Turkey also have successful and profitable high-speed rail systems.
This conference will focus on the valuable opportunity ahead of us as well as the benefits that would arise from capitalizing on this opportunity.
The California high-speed rail system would be similar to existing rail systems, except that the trains will be lighter and will run on electricity instead of diesel fuel. The system would feature fewer stations, fewer inclines and connect major metropolitan areas that are 300-500 miles apart.
Keep in mind that Anaheim and San Francisco are approximately 400 miles apart, and the fact that the train would operate at speeds of around 100-110 miles per hour (and reach speeds of nearly 220 miles per hour when traversing the Central Valley), making a commute between Anaheim and San Francisco a trip of two hours and 45 minutes.
To be able to qualify for federal funding, high-speed rail trains must 1) be able to exceed a speed of 200 miles per hour, 2) be wholly powered by electricity, 3) contain a number of stations between metropolitan areas and 4) provide transportation from San Francisco to Los Angeles in a specific period of time. We must also ensure that high-speed rail fits into existing transportation systems in a complimentary way.
Phase Two of the project will extend high-speed rail between Los Angeles, San Diego, Ontario and Sacramento.
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 8 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY
The total cost of Phase One is approximately $42.6 billion. California has been the only state in the nation to leverage federal dollars for high-speed rail. Specifically, 30% of the funds made available for high-speed rail have been allocated to California. With two years to go before breaking ground, $11 billion has been secured and another $18 billion in federal funding over the next ten years still needs to be solidified.
California must see a specific level of monetary commitment from the federal government before private funds can be raised successfully. Other projects have benefited from at least partial financing from private funding sources for high-speed rail projects throughout the world. The United Kingdom, for example, will recuperate its investment at a rate of 25 cents on the dollar.
In another year, the project will have progressed far enough along to be able to purchase property and work out construction contracts. All items pertaining to the environment must be resolved by September 2011 and construction is scheduled to begin by 2012. Some aspects of the project may not get clearance in time to meet the deadlines and will instead need to be funded in the future.
Some have questioned if the high-speed rail project may be too much of an impact on California’s landscape and therefore consideration has been given to the possibility of a shared track system, one in which freight could not be on certain tracks. This approach would have a much smaller impact on the environment and the number of properties that need to be purchased.
This is an amazing project and will require a lot of communication on all levels. In terms of production, the system would be equivalent to constructing 3,000 miles of new freeways.
Q and A
Question: We can’t force people to accept such an immense project by the deadline proposed. How can we hope to win them over, and what is the likelihood that we will win them over?
Answer: High-speed rail was established in California in 1996. However, only within the last two years has there been necessary funding for the project to move forward. Such facts can help convince people that such a system is now a real possibility. The communities in which the trains are supposed to operate have awakened. So there is finally some newfound urgency behind constructing such a system. Furthermore, we are doing our best to build the partnerships needed to move forward, both in the public and private sectors.
Question: Realistically, how do you see land use planning being influenced in the city of Anaheim by such a project?
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 9 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY Answer: We have been planning an ARTIC station in Anaheim for the last 10 years and should be breaking ground on that project in the first quarter of next year. In 2004 Anaheim established the platinum triangle around Angel Stadium. 2.2 Global Positioning: High-Speed Rail Around the Globe
2.2.1 Tom Downs, Chair, Veolia Transportation for North America (via Skype) Veolia is a Paris-based organization with 55,000 employees in 58 countries and a gross income of $55 billion per year. Veolia is the largest private sector rail organization in the world, operating 500 rails each day, including rails in Florida and California.
Spain has recently overtaken France in total miles of high-speed rail and China is currently constructing or operating 31,000 miles of high-speed rail. South Korea has 1,100 miles of high-speed rail in operation and under construction. Japan has a long record of commitment to high-speed rail and is a global leader in high-speed rail technology and operational excellence. Germany and France are also among global leaders in high-speed rail technology while Brazil, Russia and Italy are in the process of developing high-speed rail networks.
The entire industrial world is committed to building and expanding high-speed rail. The reason for such enthusiasm for high-speed rail is that high-speed rail is simply good business.
California would be the first real high-speed rail system in North America. Other states in the country are beginning to focus on high-speed rail possibilities.
Florida is considering 98 miles of rail in Florida. Florida has almost all of its money for the project in hand and is in the process of selecting a consortium. Illinois and North Carolina are also on the list of high-speed rail prospects.
Over the next five years, California must take whatever steps necessary to secure the funds for Phase One. In addition, federal regulations require that the exact route be finalized.
California needs to bring all parties together to decide and commit to a high-speed rail plan. Florida is in clear agreement throughout their state. These details are more ambiguous in California and need to be resolved between regions and businesses.
Right now, California is ready to focus on regional issues that stand as obstacles to a high-speed rail project, including development and community impacts. One caveat, the Federal Railroad Administration will mandate different standards of rail traffic for high- speed rail.
There is confusion in the marketplace and private sector about the status of high-speed rail in California.
Asian investors would bring sovereign money to build a bridgehead in North America.
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 10 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY However, it is unclear how much sovereign money can be expected unless California has defensible program elements that are part of a larger framework.
In the case of high-speed rail development, time is not our friend. Competitors in other states are gaining ground as the foreign marketplace adjusts its expectations about their investments.
Q and A
Question: Should there be concern about the targeted date of 2012 for the start of construction?
Answer: 2012 would be very aggressive. 2.3 Benefits of High-Speed Rail
2.3.1 Sarah L. Catz, Director, Center for Urban Infrastructure The study by the Center for Urban Infrastructure about high-speed rail in California was conducted during tough economic times for our state.
The July job report was dismal as it noted 200,000 more people were out of work, marking the second straight month of job losses. Unemployment is up in Orange County, San Diego and Los Angeles. Unemployment in the Inland Empire is the highest it has ever been at 15.1%.
A year ago, China invested large amounts of money into their infrastructure with the hope of repairing their economy. China understands that investment in infrastructure is a job multiplier and increases the number of good jobs.
There have been a number of studies about the effects of high-speed rail on the job market. CUI examined indirect benefits aside from jobs and revealed a variety of benefits stemming from high-speed rail, especially in terms of quality of life matters.
High-speed rail can be the same type of life changing force that Metrolink has proven to be since its creation. Over the years Metrolink riders have expressed to the organization how Metrolink has improved their lives. Some of the riders have said that riding transit has given them more quality hours to spend with their family in a given day as well as other benefits.
The costs of our current inefficient system are just as notable. For instance, traffic congestion consumes 120 million gallons of gasoline per year and being able to reduce this congestion will improve Californians’ quality of life.
High-speed rail presents a healthier lifestyle. Doctors recommend 20 minutes of exercise per day and most riders of public transportation meet this recommendation.
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 11 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY And, although national security was not specifically mentioned as a benefit in the report, the opening of a new nuclear reactor in Tehran puts the issue into new perspective.
Our dependence on foreign oil funds a region that is a hotbed of terrorist activity with American dollars. Also, our dependence makes us more likely to be drawn into conflicts that inevitably entail the type of collateral damage that breeds more anti-American sentiment globally.
High-speed rail is one area where there is a convergence of job growth and reduction of green house gas emissions.
Q and A
Question: Given the study’s conclusion that high-speed rail will create jobs, such jobs seem likely to be specifically related to the high-speed rail industry. How would the creation of such jobs stand to benefit an unemployed teacher?
Answer: Hopefully, high-speed rail would not compete with things such as education. Rather, high-speed rail’s status as a job multiplier would help to revitalize communities across the state, and thus create the types of favorable economic conditions that would foster the creation of more jobs for teachers.
2.4 How Do We Pay For High-Speed Rail?
2.4.1 Do Public-Private Partnerships Make Sense? Mike Schneider, Founder and Managing Partner of InfraConsult LLC
2.4.2 Foreign Investors Kent Carl, co-founder of Triarm International, Inc. Moderator: John Haussman, Vice-President and Program Manager of HDR Mike Schneider, Founder and Managing Partner of InfraConsult LLC
High-speed rail is an issue of great topical interest throughout California. There is also great interest in the consideration of how high-speed rail should be financed. The transit community has been particularly interested as of late in private investment and realizes that government funding alone will not fund the amount of infrastructure that is needed in this country. But we also have to ask if public/private partnerships make sense and if there is a role for the public sector. The answer is usually, yes.
While there seems to be a great deal of support for private investment, there are also some pragmatic issues that threaten private investment. One is that no matter how great the project, the private sector looks at it as a regular investment that must have a reasonable rate of return.
It is important to create an environment where it makes sense. California is not alone in this pursuit. Some states are moving faster and are farther ahead, like Florida..
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 12 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY
We want to talk about how public/private partnerships work and what they are about.
Public/private partnerships offer improved delivery in addition to improved funding. Public/private partnerships are really just an agreement between a public and private entity to finance and operate any portion of a project. Such an agreement would allow California to expedite completion of the project and improve many different aspects of the project. However, the risks undertaken need to be acceptable to both the public and the private sector.
What do risk and reward mean?
We all want to be entrepreneurs, unless being one costs us money. We all want investments but only if they have a reasonable return.
There are several different models for public/private partnerships.
However, access to funding is not the only issue. The value of the monetization of risk transfer is also important.
There are several different approaches that specify to which degree the private sector would be responsible for the funding, construction, or operation of such a project. Additionally, there are different ways in which payment can be arranged.
What is an availability payment structure?
For a project such as high-speed rail, overseas companies have a great amount of public investment. It’s easy to invest money when there are sovereign guarantees behind it. That’s what we need for public private partnerships
We need to start with documentation that is iron clad. We need to know what we are building before we start investing.
California must get consensus before it builds a train. No one is going to gamble on California doing the right thing. California needs to do the right thing to get the $10-12 billion needed from the private sector.
We have to predict how much things will cost every year and how much revenue we’re looking at. It takes companies, such as our sponsors here today, to see how much it will take to operate this train and to bet on those assumptions.
The California high-speed rail project also requires continuity. The private sector must be able to trust that the political resolve to get a project done will continue through new leadership and throughout the entire project. Such continuity is critical in any project that will require funding for the next three to five decades.
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 13 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY The project also needs to have widespread acceptability. This notion of acceptability is similar to that of consensus; the project must be largely acceptable even to those who at first glance, the project may not seem to impact directly.
Until it is clear that the high-speed rail system can happen, the project will be met by obstacle after obstacle. Private funding cannot replace good policy and planning on the part of the government.
2.4.2 Foreign Investors Kent Carl, Co-Founder of Triarm International, Inc. There has recently been a 12% drop in new home sales and until unemployment turns around, the US economy still has a long way to go to recuperate from the recession.
China presents a valuable opportunity for high-speed rail in the United States. China’s economy is the fastest growing and may surpass that of the US by 2030.
The California high-speed rail project is looking for additional funding and it could benefit from a direct investment or a direct loan. China is interested in helping and sees high- speed rail as a good investment, but would prefer a direct loan. In order to qualify for a direct loan from China, the project would need a net operating profit.
China has already studied the California Nevada Maglev project and has concluded that the system will have the necessary ridership. Consequently, China is likely to loan $7 billion to the project.
Due to the booming growth of the Chinese economy, the Chinese and American economies are becoming intertwined – China has excess funds to invest, and the United States needs the investment.
What’s the catch? The Chinese side requires incorporation of Chinese elements as well as a federal guarantee. China does not want to own US infrastructure. Repayment will not begin for years, at least until a system is operational. 2.5 Federal Strategy
2.5.1 Loretta Sanchez, United States Representative, California 47th District It is important that leaders in Orange County talk about new transportation systems.
The debate over the benefits of concrete versus rail has been taking place for many years. Highways are important and we have a commitment to maintain a system of highways that no one is trying to eliminate. Rail provides an alternative to more concrete.
Rail is right for California and more people are turning to the alternative because they do not want to drive. This is why the number two place for train travel in the United States is California. If you look at the last four sums of money provided for rail, the federal government has really jumped in. This has happened for four reasons.
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 14 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY First, the federal government has recognized the obvious benefits of rail to productivity. Next, the federal government is worried about the state of the industrial base. We need to bring the industrial base back to the United States. For instance, about a decade ago the military was seeking to develop a joint strike fighter to be shared between the services. Although we fought hard to have the planes manufactured in California, the plants were eventually built in Fort Worth with about half of the planes parts being built in California. This goes to show that the federal government wants a place to build and improve the industrial base within the United States.
The energy issue was also a key reason for increased federal spending. Most of our energy is bought from outside the United States due to our immense travel energy. In addition, we are looking for increased environmental efficiency.
Finally, the federal government wanted to see the interoperability of communities. We want to see people allowed to use an infrastructure backbone to get to their destination with ease.
The United States needs to make a decision on a federal level but we also must recognize the need to find additional funding. The federal government is willing to help out but the project needs proficient funding from other sources as well.
This is a productivity issue for the United States. We need to be building these systems or else reap the negative consequences. How much can we put into concrete before it is too much? 2.6 Getting Connected: Defining an Effective Intermodal Strategy
2.6.1 Peter Buffa, Member, Board of Directors, Orange County Transportation Authority Successful mass transit requires visionary planning and cooperation between transportation agencies, counties, cities, developers and planners.
2.6.2 Richard Flierl, Principal, Cooper Carry Internationally, we have found that speed matters and directly correlates to the success of the systems.
For example, there need to be two types of stations, those located in urban core, and those located in destination areas. The buildings within the system should be contemporary structures added to traditional structures. And, the density of the inner city is critical to the success of the rail station.
A destination station and an urban station both need transportation connections to work properly. They must utilize existing assets and maximize passenger experience. St. Pancreas rail station in London is a perfect example of an old building meeting a new structure. The art and culture within the station make it a place to occupy, not just a place to go to get on a train. The station is now a destination to be enjoyed. It includes
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 15 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY amenities, such as a shopping center and champagne bar. It is located in the center of the city and is adjacent and fully connected to Kings Cross station.
Denver has undergone a similar project at Union Station. With the invention of the multi- modal, the station’s millions of square feet of development stand to become a place of human and community interaction in the heart of Denver.
We cannot afford to not have these great buildings in public places. They are iconic places of public beauty.
2.6.3 Emile Haddad, President, Founder, and CEO FivePoint Communities For the last 50 to 60 years, we have lived against logic. For too many years, we have relied on the model of the highway, giving very little consideration to transit.
FivePoint is very engaged in Anaheim. It is the largest land owner in the Platinum Triangle which is adjacent to where the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC) is to be built. ARTIC will also be the high-speed rail station for Anaheim. There needs to be interconnectivity. If there is interconnectivity at the stations, then there is access to two new hubs.
There cannot be a metropolitan port without correctly using the land around such a port and there needs to be interconnectivity between ports and stations. There must also be a reason for people to come to the port.
How do we build around these high-speed rail stations? True mixed-used communities must surround the ports and the port needs to be vibrant and alive 24 hours per day.
2.6.4 Art Leahy, CEO, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority We are witness to shocking changes in downtown Los Angeles. Places once deemed “skid row” are now filled with couples walking their dogs at 8 o’clock in the evening and with new French restaurants. Hollywood is becoming the West Coast’s Time Square.
Orange County took the lead on high-speed rail four or five years ago. Regionally we should be thinking in terms of Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Los Angeles, and Orange County. This is a low risk investment, one that will pay huge dividends.
For people that are relatively unfamiliar with train use, there are lots of tiny barriers that discourage them from giving it a try.
There are 12 rail projects underway. The goal is to lay down 30 years of rail in 10 years.
2.6.5 Will Kempton, CEO, Orange County Transportation Authority When we talk about high-speed rail, it is critical not just to have land use connectivity and economic nodes, but also to connect high-speed rail into the transportation systems that already exist.
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 16 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY Although we all believe high-speed rail will be a good service, we need to work effectively with the community for this to be true.
In a meeting with an engineer in Anaheim to discuss the surface impact of such a project, he was informed that such a project would require 491 properties to be taken. Even with the innumerable gains of a high-speed rail system already cited, 491 properties is no small number. This only goes further to show how important it is to work closely with the communities involved.
For instance, we can have a demonstration project on existing rails. Such a project would not be true high-speed rail, but rather “higher-speed” rail. This in turn, can show the public the immense benefits that would follow an investment in a true high-speed rail system.
2.6.6 Larry Agran, Mayor Pro Tem, City of Irvine Mr. Agran supports rail regardless of speed. We need much more rail.
We need local examples that can be held up as a model for others to follow. We need to be prepared to persevere if we are going to make this project work. Planning works. Planning is better than not planning. We are still locked into the suburban model dependent on automobiles
Inner connectivity is not compatible with being a driver. The younger generations are looking to be connected, not stuck in traffic.
Collective Q and A
Question: 15 to 20 years down the line, each of these communities is going to look mostly the same as they do now. How do we retrofit these communities so that taking transit from doorstep to doorstep makes sense?
(Larry Agran) Answer: Irvine will look different. It is paramount to examine the specific obstacles that face mass transit in each community. In many cases, it is that there is no connection from the citizen’s door to the train station. This is why things such as a shuttle system are so promising. Still, we must address these issues one obstacle at a time.
Question: Why can’t we consider a subway station like the one in New York?
(Peter Buffa) Answer: Underground systems, like that in New York, are too expensive. Ultimately, something that serves the same function as New York’s subway system will exist in time, but it will not be underground or high-speed.
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 17 of 36 CONFERENCE SUMMARY Question: One of the key issues for funding is private funding. Where are we going to find $4-5 billion?
(Will Kempton) Answer: ARTIC may demonstrate the feasibility of such an investment from the private sector. Furthermore, seeing federal money going towards the project might attract such funding.
Question: What additional incentives are necessary for attracting future capital?
(Emile Haddad) Answer: We have to retool our expectations from both points of view. Capital is already spooked. Layer on top of this existing hesitation the risk of things that investors do not understand and we can begin to understand the issue of attracting capital to this project.
Question: What are the obstacles that prevent having more connectivity between existing commuter systems, including San Diego?
(Peter Buffa) Answer: There already exists a lot of confusion for a consumer using mass transit. This includes going to see the train schedule at the kiosks and being presented with two entirely different train schedules for two entirely different rail systems.
(Art Leahy) Answer: Thankfully, we can get serious about this discussion. Become impatient with your electeds. It does not make sense to have three different rail systems on the same corridor that are not coordinated. They are all operated using public money, so the services should absolutely be coordinated. The problem is not one of differing technologies, just a lack of coordination. 2.7 What are the Solutions? 2.7.1 Tom Umberg, Vice Chair, California High-Speed Rail Authority 2.7.1.1 Participated Discussion Tom Umberg facilitated a full group discussion on the solutions to increasing mobility and decreasing congestion in the southern California region. Some of the main ideas that came out of the discussion are: • Gas prices should be increased to $5.00 per gallon to fund high-speed rail • Realign Gas Tax dollars to provide funding for high-speed rail • Increase convenience of using transit • Publicize job creation • Pass strong public private partnership legislation • Realign money in terms of operations • Educate public about the benefits of high-speed rail • Increase grassroots funding • Demonstrate potential of success • Expand potential of ridership base • Translate studies on benefits into layman’s terms • Continue the discussion and convene group on a regular basis
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 18 of 36 ONLINE SURVEY 3.1 Survey Overview In October 2010 the Center for Urban Infrastructure conducted a post-conference online high-speed rail (HSR) survey and asked the conference invitation list to respond. Of the two hundred or so guests on the conference invitation list, 96 responded. Of those approximately half attended the August 26th Center for Urban Infrastructure Conference.
The survey revealed the following: • There is widespread support for HSR in California among more than 89% of respondents
• More than half of survey respondents believe that the Los Angeles to Anaheim segment should be built first
• More than 80% of respondents believe that job creation and a decrease in greenhouse gas emissions can converge with certain infrastructure projects
• Benefits of job creation and reduction of emission of greenhouse gasses, while important, take a back seat to the desire for more efficient mass transit
• Ridership and revenue are the most important benchmarks for HSR success, far surpassing environmental benefits
• Over half of the respondents believe that private investment, including foreign investment, is seen as an important part of HSR success
• Transit system connectivity is seen as an extremely important component to a successful HSR system
• There is a split opinion on whether gas tax dollars should be used for HSR
• There is strong support for the establishment of a “professional coalition” of experts to help educate the public on the benefits of HSR
• There is strong support for additional public/private partnership legislation
The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California - page 19 of 36 ONLINE SURVEY
3.2 Survey Data On August 26, 2010, the Center for Urban Infrastructure held a conference entitled “The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California” at Brandman University.
Thank you for taking a moment to respond to this survey, which is a direct result of the ideas and suggestions shared at the August 26th conference.
Sarah Catz, Director Center for Urban Infrastructure 1. Did you attend the Center for Urban Infrastructure’s conference entitled “The Light at the End of the Tunnel: Planning for High-Speed Rail in Orange County and Southern California” at Brandman University on August 26, 2010?
Yes 49.0%
No 51.0%
2. What is your occupation?
Public sector employee 25.5%
Private sector/business consultant 54.3%
Academic 1.1%
Student 1.1%
Retired 1.1%
Unemployed but searching for work 1.1%
Other 16.0%
3. Do you think HSR should be built in the United States?
Yes 95.7%
No 2.1%
Donʼt know 2.1% ONLINE SURVEY
4. Do you think HSR should be built in California?
Yes 89.4%
No 5.3%
Donʼt know 5.3%
5. If HSR is built in California, where should the first segment be built?
San Francisco to San Jose 22.1%
Merced to Fresno 2.3%
Fresno to Bakersfield 17.4%
Los Angeles to Anaheim 58.1%
6. Which of the following would be the most important benefit of HSR in southern California?
Creation of more jobs 4.2%
Increased ease of travel between California Cities 23.2%
Reduction of congestion 9.5%
Reduction of emissions 0.0%
Reduction of dependence on foreign oil 1.1%
Increase of productivity 1.1%
All of the above 58.9%
None of the above 2.1%
7. Many studies demonstrate that a direct benefit of building high- speed rail will be an increase in jobs. Do you believe:
There will be a tremendous increase in jobs 20.4%
There will be a slight increase in jobs 66.7%
There will be no increase in jobs 2.2%
Other 10.8% ONLINE SURVEY
8. Many studies demonstrate that one direct benefit of building high-speed rail will be a decrease in emissions once high-speed rail is up and running. Do you believe:
There will be a tremendous decrease in 10.8% emissions
There will be a slight decrease in emissions 68.8%
There will be no decrease in emissions 10.8%
Other 9.7%
9. Do you believe that it is possible for some infrastructure projects to produce new jobs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the same time?
Yes 82.1%
No 3.2%
Maybe 12.6%
Donʼt know 2.1%
10. Do you believe the California High-Speed Rail Project will produce new jobs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the same time?
Yes 57.4%
No 6.4%
Maybe 30.9%
Donʼt know 5.3%
11. What performance measures are important for HSR to meet during the first three years of service? (Select all that apply)
Set ridership projections 43.6%
Set revenue generation 24.5%
Set reduction in emissions 6.4%
All of the above 41.5%
None of the above 1.1%
Other 17.0% ONLINE SURVEY
12. The California HSR project has approximately $3.7 billion to build the initial segment of rail. Should the CHSRA:
Seek additional governmental funding and grants 18.1%
Seek private investment, but only if the funding 17.0% comes from US investors
Seek private investment, even if that means 51.1% going oversees for funds
Not seek additional funding and operate within 4.3% the $3.7 billion budget it already has
Donʼt know 9.6%
10. Do you believe the California High-Speed Rail Project will produce new jobs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the same time?
Definitely 23.4%
Depends on procurement 45.7%
Definitely not 25.5%
Donʼt know 5.3%
14. How important is it that there is “transit connectivity” at each high-speed rail station? (For example, an arriving passenger would be able to take transit from the HSR station to their final destination.)
Extremely important 86.3%
Somewhat important 10.5%
Somewhat unimportant 0.0%
Extremely unimportant 2.1%
Donʼt know 1.1%
15. The price of gasoline should go up to $5.00 per gallon to help fund HSR and other transit projects.
Agree 24.5%
Disagree 61.7%
Neither agree nor disagree 13.8% ONLINE SURVEY
16. Gas tax dollars should be realigned to help fund HSR and other transit projects.
Agree 48.9%
Disagree 40.4%
Neither agree nor disagree 10.6%
17. Funding should be increased for grassroots organizations to help promote HSR.
Agree 27.7%
Disagree 33.0%
Neither agree nor disagree 39.4%
18. A professional coalition should be established to educate the public and advocate for HSR.
Agree 64.9%
Disagree 10.6%
Neither agree nor disagree 24.5%
19. Public/private partnership legislation should receive more support.
Agree 83.0%
Disagree 5.3%
Neither agree nor disagree 11.7%
20. The potential success of HSR should be demonstrated in an easy to understand manner to promote public awareness.
Agree 91.5%
Disagree 2.1%
Neither agree nor disagree 6.4% ONLINE SURVEY
21. What other suggestions or input would you like to provide for this survey?
HSR needs to be built completely form LA to SF--segments will never attract the 1 needed ridership
Remove the political undertones of the project. Give more attention to the LA to 2 SB to San Diego segment.
Tax increment financing should be accomplished to leverage this HSR 3 investment, and necessary reinvestment. Perhaps there could be delayed collections associated with the downstream requirements of 'state of good repair.'
High-Speed Rail is a poor idea. More funds should be used for freeway and road 4 maintenance
continue this effort in education. outreach to local city council meetings that are 5 utilize cable TV to reach out
In Spain it was demonstrated that HSR is competitive with air travel when the trip is under 3 hours. Once built, the HSR proved the point. We need to demonstrate in the U.S. a similar scenario. The first link should be the most efficient and able to demonstrate the value of 6 HSR. The segments given in this survey may not prove this. HSR, as in Europe, has many benefits that are not easily quantifiable. The U.S. opponents will focus on a narrowly define cost/benefit analysis showing that only a small percentage in Europe use HSR. We need to show the many downstream benefits that add to quality of life, etc.
Push very hard for a regional single transit agency to coordinate all mass transit 7 efforts in at least SoCal (preferably for all of CA and into at least southern Nevada). Use the Wash. D.C. Metro as a model.
8 need more of a buy in from republican politicians in the oc
What is meant by a viable HSR project? What parameters should govern the 9 decisions making process to achieve a cost effective, efficient, and/or sustainable HSR investment?
10 Get input from all cities that are impacted.
I have 48 years Engineering & Construction experience, and have been involved in HSR programs in the past. I see major concerns on the way the money is being spent, especially on the studies and consultants selection processes; including 11 the regulatory bureaucracies that will swallow the funds, especially when State employeesʼ union get their hands on reviewing and/or approving the projects, because they need INVOLVEMENT, to show they are justified!
Planning for HSR should take into account other "station area" planning 12 considerations as well as connectivity to other modes of transit (including airports). ONLINE SURVEY
21. What other suggestions or input would you like to provide for this survey?
Survey seems to be very pro-HSR instead being more open-minded about the transportation needs of California. The first segment should be built between 13 Anaheim and Las Vegas, it would focus on young ridership and create good press for HSR. If that project proved sucessful, it would be easier to justify and promote other locations for HSR.
14 Good topic. Good conference. Keep pushing. Thanks.
Promote more success stories from other countries, specifically what steps were 15 taken to meet the challenge of change.
Each state or group of states that are now planning HSR must look at the overall transportation system at each proposed station and assure that road and transit access is planned as well. In addition, locating HSR stations within an airport or 16 proving transit access (shuttle bus or APM) to a HSR station when an airport is in close proximity can provide substantial opportunity for capturing ridership. Many foreign visitors familiar with HSR would use the airport/HSR connectivity when visiting the USA.
Need to get existing train systems (light rail, LOSSAN, Amtrak) working better to 17 build public support for passenger rail in general.
The successes of Europe and Japan should be highlighted. Californians have to 18 be "transported" to those places in some virtual way to help them understand the possiblities.
Feasibility of shared use of urban rights of way should be assured before engineering is advanced past the conceptual design level (10-20%). Private 19 sector should be allocated risk via a design, build, operate and maintain contract and should be held accountable for failure to deliver the conceptual project within the conceptual budget.
Raising CA's gas tax would be counterproductive if not raised in a similar manner 20 across the country, which I believe should take place. Funding does not need to be gov't or private - why not both working together?
The Anaheim/LA, and San Francisco/San Jose segments should be deleted, and 21 existing train systems used with higher speed equipment. The HSR system makes the most sense from LA to San Jose.
22 Go from Southern CA to Las Vegas as an option.
First check the cost of land acquisition, environmentals and the cost of tunnels as 23 our topography may not sustain HSR before we commit any more funds to this project! ONLINE SURVEY
21. What other suggestions or input would you like to provide for this survey?
Without connectivity between passenger origin/destination and the HSR, ridership would be limited to those who can both afford the cost of HRS in addition to in 24 between transportation costs. This is a concern that I would personally have coming from areas of California where public transportation development is limited.
Raise the gas tax!! it is green, will produce jobs, reduce congestion and improve 25 our quality of life
26 HSR governance and delivery must have effective oversight.
This is a new era in political and economic terms. Conventional models of success such as the Continental Railway and the Interstate system will NOT work in making the CA HSR a success. I believe the current efforts are a bit too timid in 27 their public outreach. New bold initiatives and methods are needed to further educate the public about the very serious challenges that we will face in CA in the next 40-50 years and why we have to build some projects such as the CA HSR, at ANY COST !!!!!!! THE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL PLANNING FOR HIGH-SPEED RAIL IN ORANGE COUNTY AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PRESENTER BIOGRAPHIES Sarah L. Catz is a leading advocate and public policy maker in the transportation industry. During the past eighteen years she has played a key role in critical transportation projects at both local and state levels. Ms. Catz served on the Board of Directors of the Orange County Transportation Authority from 1992 to 2002 and served as its Chair in 1998. Ms. Catz also was a founding member of the Board of Directors of the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink) and served as the Chair of the Board in 1995 and 1996. In 1999, Ms. Catz helped former Governor Davis in the transition of his new administration by serving as the acting Deputy Secretary of Transportation for the State of California as well as the Project Manager for the Governor's Infrastructure Commission. Ms. Catz currently serves as a member of the Board of Directors of the California-Nevada Sarah Catz, Director Super Speed Train Commission, which is developing a high-speed rail service between Orange Center for Urban Infrastructure County and Las Vegas. She is also the Director of the Center for Urban Infrastructure at Brandman University and is a Research Associate for the Institute of Transportation Studies at University of California, Irvine.
Gary Brahm serves as chancellor of Brandman University overseeing overall operations of the institution and managing approximately 2,262 faculty and staff, with an annual budget of approximately $80 million. Prior to his present position, Mr. Brahm served as the executive vice president for inance and administration and chief operating of icer of Chapman University for over 13 years. Prior to joining Chapman University in 1994, Mr. Brahm was vice president of inance and chief inancial of icer at National University. He has also served as vice president, chief inancial of icer, a director of Anadite, Inc. and vice president, chief inancial of icer, and a principal at LAM Industries. He has served as director and of icer at numerous non-pro it and public organizations including Chair of the Jewish Community Foundation of Orange County Gary Brahm, Chancellor and the Board of Directors of Remedy Temp, Inc. Brandman University Mr. Brahm was formerly a manager with Ernst & Whitney (now Ernst & Young). He received a bachelor’s degree in biology from California State University, Northridge and a master’s in business administration from the University of Southern California.
Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle serves as Chair of the Board for the California High-Speed Rail Authority. The CHSRA is responsible for developing the $40 billion high-speed rail system from Anaheim to San Francisco. He also served with distinction in the California State Assembly from 1988 - 1990 and again from 1992 - 1998. Mayor Pringle was elected Speaker of the California State Assembly in January 1996, and served as Speaker until December 1996. Mayor Pringle was elected Mayor of Anaheim in November 2002 and successfully re-elected in November 2006. Since he took of ice, Anaheim has earned the distinction of being a municipality with a “freedom-friendly” approach to governing. In addition to his civic duties, Mayor Pringle runs Curt Pringle & Associates, a public relations, Curt Pringle, Mayor governmental affairs and consulting irm located in Orange County. He also serves as an City of Anaheim adjunct political science faculty member at the University of California, Irvine, where he teaches California government. Mayor Pringle actively serves as Governing Board Member for the Ukleja Center for Ethical Leadership, California State University, Long Beach, as well on the boards of the Tiger Woods Learning Center Foundation and the John Burton Foundation for Children Without Homes. Tom Downs is the Chair of the Board of Veolia Transportation for North America. Veolia is the largest private-sector transit company in North America. He began his career in transportation when he was appointed as a White House Fellow and served in the Of ice of the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation. In the federal government, Mr. Downs also served as the Associate Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration and as Executive Director of the Federal Transit Administration. Mr. Downs later served as the Director of Transportation for Washington, DC and in that role participated as a member of the Washington Metro Board and as Chair of the regional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). He was later appointed City Administrator of Washington, DC. In 1988, Mr. Downs became the President of the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority in Tom Downs, Chair New York. Mr. Downs was later appointed Commissioner of Transportation by the Governor Veolia Transportation for N.A. of New Jersey and in that role he also served as the Chair of New Jersey Transit, the state-wide transit authority. In 1993, Mr. Downs was appointed Chair and CEO of Amtrak. Mr. Downs subsequently became the President and CEO of the Eno Transportation Foundation.
Adam Christian is currently working for Sharon Greene & Associates on LA Metro's public- private partnership program. He is the author of a 2009 Harvard Kennedy School case study on California high-speed rail and the co-author of the Center for Urban Infrastructure report, "Thinking Ahead: High-Speed Rail in Southern California." Mr. Christian is a recent graduate of the master’s program in urban planning at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design, where he specialized in real estate development and transportation planning. He is particularly interested in suburban environments and examples of innovative master-planned communities that represent an alternative to conventional “sprawl.” Formerly employed in the ilm industry, he was inspired by his experience living and working in Los Angeles to better understand the city’s unique history and development patterns. This Adam Christian curiosity lourished into a decision to pursue formal studies in urban planning. Urban Planner His work has also been published in Urban Land, California Builder & Developer, Slate Magazine, and The American Prospect. His translations of French sociologist François Ascher and architect Philippe Rahm most recently appeared in the Spring/Summer 2009 issue of Harvard Design Magazine.
Michael Schneider is founder and managing partner of InfraConsult LLC, a management consulting irm specializing in the development and inancing of sustainable infrastructure projects and solutions. Most recently, Mr. Schneider has focused his practice on two primary areas: innovative project development and delivery strategies, principally in the transport domain; and public-private partnerships (PPPs) for transportation and infrastructure development. Prior to founding InfraConsult, Mr. Schneider was with international engineering irm Parsons Brinckerhoff for over 30 years, most recently as Executive Vice President of the parent corporation, PB Inc., and founder and President of its management consulting group, PB Consult. He has been active for many years in civic and professional activities and has written Michael I. Schneider, and lectured extensively on alternative project delivery mechanisms and infrastructure Managing Parnter program management. Mr. Schneider is acknowledged to be among of the nation’s most InfraConsult LLC prominent authorities on private investment in public works. Mr. Schneider holds a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering and a master’s degree in urban and regional planning and economics from the University of California, Los Angeles. Kent Carl is a co-founder and has been President of Triarm International, Inc. since its inception in February of 2009. He was instrumental in brokering a deal between General Motors and Zhong Ke San Huan of China for the supply of rare earth magnets in alternative fuel vehicle traction motors.
Mr. Carl has begun his quest to bring China and the United States together to collaborate on large-scale U.S. green energy projects. He is committed to improving U.S. infrastructure and reducing global carbon emissions by implementing and developing the latest in green technology with the combined goal of creating hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs. Kent Carl, President Triarm International Mr. Carl earned a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration with a split emphasis in Marketing and Entrepreneurial Studies from the University of Southern California in 1994.
John Haussmann is vice-president and principal program manager of HDR, an international architecture, engineering and consulting irm. Mr. Haussmann focuses on major California rail programs and is now involved in HDR’s work for the CHSRA in the San Jose to Merced corridor and for the City of San Mateo where HDR is supporting the city’s review of alignments, constructability, cost and right-of-way impacts of the high-speed train segment through community. Mr. Haussmann is a 42-year veteran in the transportation industry and refers to himself as one of those transit gypsies who has moved many times to follow the USA rail transit marketplace from the East Coast to the West Coast, inally settling in California in 1993. He John G. Haussmann also worked in Hong Kong, South Korea, Malaysia and Australia on a variety of railway, airport VP and Principal Pgm Mgr and bridge projects and for two years commuted to Paci ic Rim countries on a monthly basis. HDR Mr. Haussmann’s involvement in intercity passenger rail and HSR projects began in the early 1980s following the early efforts in Florida and Nevada to evaluate potential HSR and Magnetic Levitation systems.
Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez is proud to represent California's 47th Congressional District, which includes the cities of Anaheim, Garden Grove, Santa Ana and Fullerton in Orange County. She began her congressional career in November 1996 and is currently serving her seventh term in the U.S. House of Representatives. A recognized leader on national security, intelligence, and counterterrorism issues, Rep. Sanchez serves as the Vice Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee and is a member of the Subcommittees on Border, Maritime, and Global Counterterrorism and Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology. Rep. Sanchez was appointed to serve on the Joint Economic Committee (JEC), a bicameral Congressional Committee composed of ten members from each the Senate and the House of Hon. Loretta Sanchez, Representatives, whose primary purpose is to continually monitor matters relating to the US United States Representative economy. California 47th District A product of public schools and Head Start, Sanchez is a graduate of Chapman University and American University's MBA program. Prior to serving in Congress, she was a inancial manager at the Orange County Transportation Authority, an assistant vice president at Fieldman, Rollap and Associates, and an associate at Booz, Allen, and Hamilton. Richard Flierl joined Cooper Carry in 1998, where he founded the Center for Connective Architecture. In 2006, Mr. Flierl brought his experience and philosophy on urban growth to the West Coast with the opening of Cooper Carry’s California of ice in Newport Beach. Mr. Flierl has directed the design for a wide variety of public/private civic and redevelopment efforts worldwide. He brings design experience rooted in a collaborative approach to a shared vision. The Center for Connective Architecture at Cooper Carry specializes in urbanism issues and the design and planning for projects ranging from urban redevelopment, transit-oriented development, streetscape vision, public spaces, plazas, parks and entertainment districts. Mr. Flierl is the Chair of the ULI Place Initiative Council for Orange County & the Inland Empire, a member of the ULI Public Private Partnership (PPC) National Council, the American Richard Flierl, ASLA, Principal Society of Landscape Architects, and the Congress of New Urbanism. The Center for Connective Architecture at Cooper Carry His expertise in TOD has him currently leading the efforts for the Intermodal Transit Station and TOD Village in San Bernardino and Anaheim Paci iCenter. Mr. Flierl is a frequent public speaker, design juror, panelist, and symposium leader on topics of transit oriented development, urban redevelopment and authentic creation of place. Mr. Flierl is passionate about public transit and believes it is time for the success of transit development.
Emile Haddad is the founder of FivePoint Communities, an independent development company involved in the development of the Newhall Ranch, the former Marine Corps Air Station El Toro and San Francisco’s Shipyard at Hunter’s Point, Treasure Island and Candlestick Park projects. Prior to opening FivePoint, Mr. Haddad was the Chief Investment Of icer at Lennar, one of the largest publicly held homebuilders in the United States. In his capacity at Lennar, he oversaw the company’s land investments and asset management, which included over 250,000 homesites owned and controlled. Mr. Haddad also supervised many ventures in which Lennar was the manager of several billion dollars in assets. Mr. Haddad was with Lennar from its inception in California, and was key to its growth in the West. Emile Haddad, Founder, President and CEO Prior to Lennar, he was the Senior Vice President of Bramalea, which was part of a Canadian FivePoint Communities real estate conglomerate in the 1980s and early 1990s. A nationally recognized land expert, Mr. Haddad has received many honors and awards. He currently serves on the University of California at Irvine’s Foundation Board and its School of Real Estate, as well as the Foundation Board of Children’s Hospital of Orange County.
Will Kempton is chief executive of icer of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), a countywide transportation agency with 1,900 employees and an annual budget of $1.2 billion. Under the direction of a 17-voting member Board of Directors, he is responsible for planning, inancing and coordinating Orange County's freeway, street and rail development as well as managing bus services, commuter-rail services, paratransit van service for people with disabilities and a host of other transportation programs. He has served in the position since August 2009. Prior to joining OCTA, Mr. Kempton served as the director of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), overseeing an annual operating budget of more than $13.8 billion Will Kempton, CEO with $10 billion worth of transportation improvements under construction and 22,000 Orange County employees. Transportation Authority Appointed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in November 2004, Kempton was also responsible for managing the day-to-day operations of California’s state transportation system, including more than 50,000 lane miles of state highways stretching from Mexico to Oregon and from the Paci ic Ocean to Nevada and Arizona. ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Arthur T. Leahy is one of the nation’s leading transportation executives. He started out as a bus driver in Los Angeles 39 years ago and is currently the Chief Executive Of icer of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro). Metro is the lead transportation planning and programming agency for the county and funds construction of numerous street, highway and transit improvements running the gamut from bike and pedestrian improvements to new busways and rail lines to freeway carpool lanes and sound walls. He has served in the position since April 2009. Metro is the third largest public transportation agency in the United States. It has a $3.9 billion annual budget and more than 9,000 employees. It operates approximately 200 bus routes serving a 1,433 square mile service area and ive subway and light rail lines. Metro’s total annual bus and rail ridership exceeds 400 million boardings. Arthur T. Leahy , CEO Los Angeles County MTA Prior to Metro, Mr. Leahy headed the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) from 2001 to 2009 where he oversaw the planning, inancing and coordination for Orange County’s freeway, street and transit development as well as managed the 12th busiest bus system in the country along with commuter rail, and paratransit services for the disabled, among other transportation programs
Irvine Mayor Pro Tem Larry Agran graduated Phi Beta Kappa from the University of California at Berkeley in 1966, majoring in both history and economics. In 1969, he graduated with honors from Harvard Law School, where he specialized in public interest law. As a highly respected public interest attorney and public policy expert, in the 1990s, Mr. Agran founded and led a number of non-pro it organizations, including the Local Elected Of icials Project; the Center for Innovative Diplomacy, and CityVote. As the founder and volunteer chair of Project ’99, from 1994 to 1999, Mr. Agran was especially active in working to promote creation of the Orange County Great Park at the former Marine Corps Air Station at El Toro. Mr. Agran served on the Irvine City Council from 1978 to 1990 and from 1998 to present, Hon. Larry Agran including ten years as Mayor. Since 2005, Mr. Agran has served as the Chair of the nine- Mayor Pro Tem member Board of Directors of the Orange County Great Park Corporation. City of Irvine The Great Park Corporation is the entity designated by the Irvine City Council to help bring about the design, construction and operation of the Great Park, America’s irst great metropolitan park of the 21st century.
As one of two public members on the OCTA Board of Directors, Director Peter Buffa serves on the Executive Committee and is a member of the following committees: Finance and Administration, Legislative and Communications, and Transportation 2020. Mr. Buffa is a media, corporate communications and intergovernmental consultant. He formed Petrone' Communications, Inc., a media production and consulting irm, in 1983. His work in documentary television has earned numerous awards, including two EMMY Awards and awards from the New York and Moscow Film Festivals (The Mechanical Universe, PBS.)
Mr. Buffa served as a Council Member and Mayor of Costa Mesa from 1986 to 1998, following Peter Buffa, Director two years as a Planning Commissioner. From 1987 to 1998, Mr. Buffa served as a Director of Orange County the Transportation Corridor Agencies, including two terms as Chair of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Authority Corridor Agency. Mr. Buffa received special recognition from the American Road & Transportation Builders Association for his work on innovative transportation projects.
ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Tom Umberg is the the vice-chair of the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA). The CHSRA is responsible for developing the $40 billion high-speed rail system from Anaheim to San Francisco. Mr. Umberg also served three terms in the California Legislature, most recently between 2004 and 2006. While in the California Assembly, he chaired the Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials. He authored 58 measures that were signed into law, including statutes involving election reform, campaign inance reform, white-collar crime, mortgage fraud, telemarketing fraud, hate crimes, toxic waste cleanup, housing loans, super speed rail transport, and other transportation issues. In 1997, Mr. Umberg was nominated by the President and unanimously con irmed by the U. S. Senate as Deputy Director of the White House Of ice of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). Tom Umberg, Partner At ONDCP he was responsible for the development and coordination of United States policy to Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP reduce the supply of illegal drugs in the United States. Mr. Umberg is a colonel in the Army Reserve. During his military career he tried over 50 felony cases in Korea, Italy and the United States. Mr. Umberg was recalled to active duty to serve in Operation Noble Eagle and Operation Enduring Freedom. CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED LINES
Palmdale Los Angeles Sylmar City of Industry Burbank Ontario Airport Sacramento UC Riverside Norwalk
Anaheim San Francisco Murieta Irvine Escondido University City Fresno San Diego
Bakersfield
Los Angeles
Irvine
San Diego Brandman University 16355 Laguna Canyon Road, Irvine, CA 92618 Phone 949.585.2989 [email protected] To view the complete study, visit www.c-u-i.org