OUTREACH MATERIALS

Click on a thumbnail to view the item in your web browser. If you are using Internet Explorer, you can download the image by right-clicking on a thumbnail and choosing "Save Target As". Please contact us if you are interested in receiving hard copy of any of these materials.

Our Brochure - New Printing April 2005!

Our Bumper Sticker

Our Action Cards - New Printing April 2005!

News-Press Op/Ed - March 20, 2005

A rail line or a wider 101?

by COAST Board Member Jan Atkins

Kudos to council members Roger Horton and Helene Schneider for their clear-headed support for commuter rail.  Commuter rail just makes sense and our community is ready, so why is it taking so long to use that long stretch of train tracks that sits empty day after day while thousands are stuck in traffic?

In a recent article, the News-Press accurately reported Governor Michael Dukakis' well-informed recommendation not to spend one more nickel to add lanes to Highway 101. No major freeway in the United States , he said, works at 5pm in the afternoon.

We must have an alternative to congestion on highway 101. If SBCAG and Parsons/Brinkerhoff are motivated, it would take just two to four years for convenient commuter rail to be up and running between Oxnard and Goleta . Metrolink, providing service to five counties, took just over two years to speed commuters past congested freeways – the same sad roads whose widening had been sold to voters as the once and final solution to their traffic woes.

The cost of commuter rail pales in comparison to the cost of adding lanes to the road. According to SBCAG, going from four to six lanes south of Milpas means going from six to eight between Milpas and Patterson. This dead-end exercise in futility could top half a billion dollars, say SBCAG officials. The estimate does not include untold millions in costs handed off to each city and the county who will have to deal with all those additional cars congesting local roads and neighborhoods.

At the expense of transit with no mention of popular expanded rail service, it's no wonder that Ventura County 's Measure B sales tax failed.Voters wisely defeated a proposal to widen all five major highways.

Diverting hundreds of millions of dollars to add lanes that will become congested almost as soon as they open after years of construction disruptions to our local economy just seems wasteful. If this concrete-heavy approach is taken when Measure D gets back on our ballot, it will be doomed to the same fate.

Other rail projects in Phoenix , Denver , and Atlanta had to lay miles of new track, build multiple stations, add grade-separated crossings, and purchase expensive rights of way. Mega project Sprinter, in San Diego County , will cost over $375 million. Fortunately, we already have the track, stations, and adequate right of way. A major part of the investment here has already been made.

What would it cost to put our commuter rail system in place? Only an estimated $50-65 million to get started and about $3-6 million a year to operate with absolutely no freeway construction impacts. These are early figures offered by Metrolink's executive director and SBCAG.

These things are certain: Over fifteen thousand area workers are desperate for a way around the current congestion not to mention some way to avoid the years of already approved highway construction delays looming on the near horizon. With ridership in the LOSSAN corridor between San Diego and San Luis Obispo increasing by 20-25% each year, rivaling the Northeast corridor for top honors, the South Coast is saying yes to comfortable morning and evening commuter trains. The alternative of commuter rail is consistent with our image of the beauty of our area, a European style solution that keeps the high values we cherish while meeting the needs of our workforce, without which we lose major employers. This is Santa Barbara , after all, our American Riviera.

COAST Letter to LOSSAN Stakeholders Regarding Planning for Commuter Rail on the South Coast
December 16, 2004

To LOSSAN Stakeholders,

The Coalition for Sustainable Transportation (COAST) promotes sustainable transportation and reduced dependency on automobiles. COAST works toward a vision of well-planned communities that encourage walking, bicycling and transit for access to all daily needs. We strongly urge the Stakeholders to include commuter rail between Ventura and Goleta as a necessary component of future plans for the rail corridor. There are many reasons why we consider commuter rail to a desirable and virtually inevitable part of our local transportation future:

• There are currently over 20,000 round-trip commutes per day between Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties , and that number is growing steadily as high housing prices prevent many who work in Santa Barbara from also living here. (A similar trend is occurring to the North, with a rapidly growing number of workers commuting from Lompoc and the Santa Ynez valley.)
• In COAST's outreach activities, we have found that both commuters from Ventura County and employers in Santa Barbara County are very positive about commuter rail. Major employers such as UCSB appear willing to provide shuttle service to and from the rail stations.
• Geographical constraints make highway expansion along the Santa Barbara County 101 corridor even more costly and time-consuming than in other regions.
• Surveys show that more residents favor commuter rail than favor highway expansion as a means of improving accessibility. Also, past local experience shows that there can be strong public and political opposition to major highway expansion projects.
• Local planning agencies have acknowledged that no single solution will be adequate for the long term, and that both road and transit solutions will be needed.
• Commuter rail is very attractive from a planning perspective because it will require less capital and lower lead times than major highway projects, and will go further in meeting air quality and other environmental goals. In addition, commuter rail can provide relief from traffic delays during highway construction, and can help ensure that new highway capacity will remain adequate after construction is completed.
• Funding initiatives for commuter rail are becoming more popular and successful. Last month, rail sales tax ballot measures passed in Sonoma and Marin counties, as well as in the cities of Phoenix , Austin and Denver.

Specifically, we request that the Stakeholders continue cooperation and negotiation with Union Pacific to bring about a mix of freight and passenger traffic that is most beneficial to the public, as has been achieved in other regions where commuter rail and freight operators share facilities. We also request that all plans for rail improvements include the sidings, future storage facilities and minor station improvements that will be needed for commuter rail service between Ventura and Goleta . Eventual service extensions to North Santa Barbara County should also be considered.

Sincerely,

Jessica Scheeter
Executive Director

COAST Letter to Santa Barbara City Planning Commission Regarding Commuter Rail as Freeway Construction Mitigation
December 16, 2004

Dear Chair and Members of the Santa Barbara Planning Commission,

The Coalition for Sustainable Transportation (COAST) promotes sustainable transportation and reduced dependency on automobiles. COAST works toward a vision of well-planned communities that encourage walking, bicycling and transit for access to all daily needs. We strongly urge SBCAG and Caltrans to continue to move forward with the option of Construction Traffic Mitigation with Commuter Rail.

The Planning Commission Staff Report (pp. 16-17) states that Caltrans and Amtrak have looked into options for running one or more morning trains from Ventura to Santa Barbara, but responded negatively due to difficulty in finding train storage locations and Federal law regarding Amtrak offering commute service. We believe that these obstacles are serious, but we are not convinced that they are insurmountable. We believe that a solution could be found with enough serious consideration and creativity, and our Directors offer their assistance in any way possible to arrive at such a solution.

Even with all lanes on 101 remaining open during this project, it is likely that the reduction in capacity will be enough to cause much increased congestion at what is already a traffic bottleneck. A non-highway alternative will be the most effective way for many commuters to avoid this congestion, and is also the most popular alternative as measured in a recent SBCAG public survey. It will also reduce congestion delays for the majority of commuters who still travel by car.

In the longer term planning, as reflected the 101 in Motion policy options, it is very likely that this project will be followed by further highway construction between Santa Barbara and Ventura. If the planning were to begin now, a commuter rail alternative could be in place in time to provide traffic mitigation not only for much of this project, but for future projects as well. A rail alternative will also help to ensure that the added highway capacity will be adequate to meet demand for many years into the future. Otherwise, we will all soon be wondering why we even bothered to invest all of this money and to spend all the extra time sitting in traffic watching the construction crews. With housing prices forcing much of the workforce out of Santa Barbara, we cannot afford to also leave those commuters with no alternative except for crawling traffic—a situation that will eventually weaken our local economy along with our environment.

We request that SBCAG immediately fund and contract a detailed planning study towards commuter rail service between Ventura and Goleta, using both funds from this project and from other available sources, including the Measure D funds that were originally earmarked for this specific purpose.

Sincerely,

Jessica Scheeter
Executive Director

News-Press Letters - December 11, 2004

Rail transit key part of road relief

I am writing in response to Tuesday's letter to the editor, "Third lane beats rail for curbing traffic."

The writer refers to a discussion of congestion relief in the heavily traveled Northeast corridor, which usually describes the corridor between Boston and Washington, D.C., including New York and Philadelphia. Unfortunately, the writer makes a mistake made often when attempting to compare congestion relief associated with transit to that associated with freeway lanes.

What is absent from the discussion is an analysis of what traffic congestion would be like without transit.

In the case of the Northeast corridor, where millions commute daily using a variety of rail-based transit options, there is little doubt that everyone, especially drivers, appreciates the contribution rail transportation makes to congestion relief. Ask any commuter in the corridor what it would be like if the trains shut down.

SBCAG's 101 In Motion project, www.101InMotion.com, correctly points out that "no one solution will solve the problem."

Commuter rail can be part of a package of solutions that improves our quality of life, and it can become as indispensable in our area as it is in the Northeast corridor. Log on to www.CoastalRailNow.org to find out how.

Jonathan Maguire, Santa Barbara

Independent Voices - December 9, 2004

RAIL RELIEF

by H. ALEXANDER PUJO, a Santa Barbara architect and longtime advocate for sustainable transportation and planning.

Every day spent stuck in traffic is a reminder that our area does not have commuter rail, that it needs it badly, and that it needs it now. This is not an editorial against freeway widening. Far from that, for the widening of Highway 101 seems as inevitable as death and taxes. But freeway widening is not the only solution to gridlock available to us, nor is it the easiest, fastest, or cheapest.

Most people do not realize that the 101 widening south of Milpas Street has already begun. Sure, you don't see bulldozers, dust, orange flags, and construction barriers yet, but they are coming. A package of "Operational Improvements" in the order of $80 million is underway, which has been slowed down at the last minute by the budget mess in Sacramento .

The first section, Milpas to Cabrillo, has completed environmental review and is ready to receive its Coastal Permit in a few days. This project has strong community support because of aesthetics, landscaping, and, most importantly, because it enhances circulation, both vehicular and non-motorized, across the 101 divide. The second section, Linden Avenue to Casitas Pass , is running behind schedule because of right-of-way acquisition and frontage road design problems, but it is well underway. A smaller element, a third northbound lane on Ortega Hill, will be the first to break ground in 2005.

This $80 million construction package, delayed by dwindling funding, is not the full six-lane widening that many dream of, but it is an indispensable part of the larger project. It will be rough going for a few years of dust and detours, but we are promised completion by 2009 or 2010, if funding is restored. During the initial rounds of highway construction, congestion on the freeway is expected to reach monumental proportions unless alternatives to travel on 101 are put in place. Subsequent construction projects will extend congestion delays far into the future.

So, as I sit in my car idling, I look over at a set of empty railroad tracks and think to myself: I could be riding on a commuter train, reading the paper over a cup of coffee, looking at the surf, or working on my laptop.

The time for commuter rail is now. The jobs-to-housing imbalance is becoming more and more profound. Wealthier people are snapping up houses on the South Coast , making it impossible for thousands of workers to live near their jobs. There is an enormous, growing need to provide efficient transportation for a displaced workforce that cannot afford to live here. It behooves us to do it in the most practical, fastest, cheapest, and environmentally superior way. Aside from the time and expense - the entire widening project could top half a billion dollars and take 15 years - needed to add a third freeway lane all the way to Ventura , two unintended consequences are expected: expanded demand and impacts to local infrastructure. Congestion south of Milpas currently acts as a pressure regulator for the six-lane section of 101 through Santa Barbara , especially during the morning rush hour. This segment is approaching capacity from Carrillo to Las Positas. A traffic increase of 30 percent is expected when the additional lane is built. Traffic engineers tell us that adding lanes south of Milpas Street will require a new round of construction between Santa Barbara and Goleta . A new lane below Milpas, they say, will cause the existing six-lane segment to come to a standstill, and a new Santa Barbara to Goleta eight-lane project will be necessary.

Traffic impacts at interchanges and surface streets like Castillo, Carrillo, Anacapa, and Mission will also result from this influx of additional rush-hour vehicles. It will be practically impossible to add capacity to these arterials without drastically changing the character of downtown. And we should not forget about parking these extra vehicles, a situation with which we are already struggling. Once these factors are taken into consideration, it becomes increasingly clear that encouraging people to commute without driving has tremendous advantages for established city centers like Carpinteria, Goleta , and Santa Barbara . The time for implementation of commuter rail is approaching high noon.

It is incumbent upon our regional transportation authority, the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG), to proceed with a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a Rail Study now, regardless of whether or not the freeway widening becomes a reality. Road expansion projects are not a substitute for rail development. On the contrary, they increase the need for rail because of construction delays. That is why it is essential to direct funds earmarked to mitigate the traffic congestion caused by the upcoming Operational Improvement projects to commuter rail. If we miss these opportunities, we postpone relief that could make a difference now.

On Thursday, December 16, members of the City of Santa Barbara Planning Commission will request Caltrans to initiate this type of service as construction mitigation for the Milpas to Cabrillo improvements. The meeting is at City Hall and the public is invited to comment.

The general parameters of commuter rail have already been identified and are available online at coastalrailnow.org. Unlike more expensive light rail systems, commuter rail service could run on existing tracks, starting at Montalvo Station in Ventura County , where it connects to Metrolink, with stops at Ventura , Carpinteria, Santa Barbara , and Goleta . Service would require the purchase or lease of train sets and upgrades to some crossings and stations. Only one or two additional sidings may be needed to optimize scheduling for the additional service. There is no overwhelming reason why rush hour rail service could not be implemented by the end of 2006, providing an option for commuters while highway improvements are under construction.

So the next time you find yourself stuck in traffic, look over at the empty train tracks and know that relief could be on the way. Write, speak, advocate for rail. The time is now.

News-Press Letters - December 3, 2004

Road to better 101 rides on rails, too

I've been encouraged to see recent News-Press articles mentioning the prospect of commuter rail service during peak traffic hours between Ventura and Santa Barbara and Goleta. All of the policy packages that Santa Barbara County Association of Governments is studying in its 101 in Motion project include road and transit improvements, recognizing that no single solution will be enough to meet long-term transportation needs in the region.

Highway construction projects are massively expensive and typically take more than 10 years to complete. Contrary to what some readers have suggested in recent letters, commuter rail service can be put in place on the existing tracks between Ventura and Santa Barbara for a fraction of the cost of adding new highway lanes.

Furthermore, there is no reason why rail service could not be up and running within a few years, providing an option for commuters to avoid longer congestion delays while new highway improvements are under construction.

It is also important to realize that commuter rail is not something only planners and environmentalists support. In a recent survey commissioned by SBCAG, commuter rail was the option most preferred by the public.

Working with the Coalition for Sustainable Transportation, I have spoken to hundreds of commuters who are frustrated daily by looking at the empty railroad tracks while sitting in traffic jams on 101.

Readers can find more specific information on local commuter rail, including a number of recent press articles, at www.coastalrailnow.org.

Mark Bradley, Santa Barbara

Letter to David Gunn - June 9, 2004

Current Efforts Letter - January 22, 2004