Ridership

So, the California High-Speed Rail Authority was wrong. The bullet trains from Anaheim and Los Angeles to San Francisco will not cost $34 billion as originally estimated, or $43 billion as the authority insisted just two years ago, but closer to $100 billion. Critics say the agency's new $98.5-billion estimate is low, and the authority admits it might go as high as $117.6 billion, but for sake of argument call the cost $100 billion. The authority is offering us less for more.

A transportation expert hired by California bullet train officials to ensure the accuracy of critical ridership forecasts worked for the company that prepared the estimates and maintains a close relationship with one of the firm's top executives. The consultant, Frank S. Koppelman, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at Northwestern University, has chaired the California High-Speed Rail Authority's ridership review panel since December 2010, assessing the projections of Cambridge Systematics Inc., a Massachusetts-based research company.

I read your editorial ("Looks Like a Winner So Far," Jan. 21) about the success of the Blue Line with interest. However, I think the following should also be considered before the line is deemed a success or not: It appears that the anticipated ridership figures were set ridiculously low by the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission in order to make sure that they were exceeded by actual numbers. The current rail ridership could probably be served by about 100 new buses, at only a fraction of the capital investment.

Gas isn't getting any cheaper. The average pump price nationwide has jumped 12 cents per gallon over the last two weeks. As a result, we're seeing one of the biggest spikes in public transportation ridership in more than half a century. Americans took 10.4 billion trips on public transportation last year, the second-highest total since 1957, as gas prices continued climbing, the American Public Transportation Assn. reported. Ridership was up last year 2.3% from 2010, with the increase spread across large, medium and small communities.

The state panel charged with building California's 800-mile bullet train network pushed back Thursday against an academic analysis challenging the reliability of ridership and revenue estimates underpinning the massive project. The UC Berkeley-based Institute of Transportation Studies last week reported that patronage models for the $42-billion first phase were too flawed to accurately predict whether the trains would run severe deficits or generate large operating surpluses, as planners predict.

A transportation expert hired by California bullet train officials to ensure the accuracy of critical ridership forecasts worked for the company that prepared the estimates and maintains a close relationship with one of the firm's top executives. The consultant, Frank S. Koppelman, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at Northwestern University, has chaired the California High-Speed Rail Authority's ridership review panel since December 2010, assessing the projections of Cambridge Systematics Inc., a Massachusetts-based research company.

Ridership forecasts for the California high-speed rail project are so unreliable that it is difficult to predict whether the proposed bullet train would be profitable or suffer severe revenue shortfalls, according to a report released Thursday by transportation experts at UC Berkeley. The analysis by the Institute of Transportation Studies challenges the optimistic ridership forecasts by the California High-Speed Rail Authority that indicate the 800-mile system from San Diego to San Francisco would not be a drain on taxpayers.

L.A. County transit officials are forecasting the largest operating deficit in their history, prompting them to consider cuts to bus and rail service as well as fare increases. The shortfall, caused by cuts in state funding as well as an 8% decline in ridership over the last year, could be more bad news for L.A. riders, who have long complained about crowded buses and limited services. "The issue is coming to a head, that they're a quarter-billion dollars short on operating.

The first time Jacquelyn Carr decided to take a bus in Los Angeles, she felt as if she were navigating a new world. As she arrived at the bus stop at Wilshire Boulevard and Barrington Avenue, the 26-year-old wondered if she was on the right side of the street. She could not help but fixate on what her friends would think if they saw her. She grabbed a seat on the bus and immediately noticed the garish multicolored upholstery of the seats. She couldn't help but wonder what fabric they used.

Re "They're trading time for money," July 8 Although the growth in ridership on Los Angeles' subways and light rail has been smaller in numbers than the increase in bus boardings, the growth in rail ridership is proportionally greater. While bus boardings are up 12.5% since January, the Blue Line and the Red Line have seen 14% increases, and Gold Line ridership is up 22%. Metro should invest where the growth is -- subways and light rail. Scott Schmidt West Hollywood The writer is a member of the Southern California Rail Riders Union.

So, the California High-Speed Rail Authority was wrong. The bullet trains from Anaheim and Los Angeles to San Francisco will not cost $34 billion as originally estimated, or $43 billion as the authority insisted just two years ago, but closer to $100 billion. Critics say the agency's new $98.5-billion estimate is low, and the authority admits it might go as high as $117.6 billion, but for sake of argument call the cost $100 billion. The authority is offering us less for more.

It's easy to see why many Californians are losing patience with the bullet train. Voters who were asked in 2008 to approve $9.95 billion in bonds to build a high-speed rail line from Los Angeles to San Francisco were told the project would cost $33 billion and be completed by 2020, yet a more realistic business plan released Tuesday by the rail authority placed the price tag at — whoops — $98 billion and the completion date at 2033....

When John E. Fenton took over Metrolink in April of last year, the government-run railroad had fallen off the tracks. Several million dollars in inventory was unaccounted for. Ridership was declining and staff morale had plummeted. After a head-on crash with a freight train in Chatsworth killed 25 people in 2008, the line had the worst safety record in the nation for a commuter railroad. Today — 16 months after Fenton arrived — Metrolink has changed by a number of critical measures.

Fresh questions about the ridership and revenue projections that underpin the state's $43-billion bullet train project have been raised in a new internal report by the agency charged with building the system. Among the key conclusions of a California High Speed Rail Authority panel of experts is that forecasts of up to 117 million annual riders by 2030 — which have helped support predictions that the system would generate billions in profits — need to be recalibrated to be more conservative and better reflect important factors that could affect ridership.

We didn't just survive "Carmageddon" last weekend, we basked in it. Neighbors had dinner together. Angelenos strolled to their local coffee shops and biked around town. County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky gushed that Los Angeles residents "have turned Carmageddon into Carmaheaven. " People waxed wistfully that we should do this every weekend. Well, no, we can't do it every weekend. Just as Carmageddon was a construction success because time was built into the schedule for things to go wrong (nothing did)

It's not easy to argue that cutting service is actually good for customers. So big props to Art Leahy, chief executive of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, who told me with a straight face that the decision to eliminate two bus lines and scale back about a dozen more will result in better public transit for the people of Los Angeles. "We can achieve seeming incompatibles," he said. "We will reduce the quantity of service while improving the quality of service. " Impressive.

A July 13 article on the performance of American rail systems erroneously quoted Sacramento's light rail ridership as 13,000 in contrast with projections of 50,000. Actually, in the final environmental impact statement, adopted just prior to the commitment to build the system, the federally approved weekday ridership forecast was 20,500. Current ridership is now over 21,000 daily boardings. Rush-hour trains are crowded; additional cars are under construction to expand capacity, and the system is generally considered a technical and political success.

Regarding the article on 50% reduction in school bus ridership in an attempt to recoup costs ("School Bus Fees Cut Ridership Up to 50% in Some O.C. Districts," Sept. 25): What does the AQMD have to say about this? It looks like one small step forward for balancing the school budget and a giant step backward in the fight against smog. JOHN UNRATH, Seal Beach

Reporting from New York In the summer movie thriller "Salt," Angelina Jolie's character smashes her way out of police cars, dives from a highway overpass onto the top of a passing big rig, then tackles a speeding motorcyclist and roars off on his two wheels, leaving a flaming landscape of twisted metal, shattered glass and bloodied cops. But when it's time for Jolie's indestructible spy, Evelyn Salt, to flee Washington, D.C., for New York, her mode of transport takes a deluxe turn.

Over the objections of some transit riders, L.A. County officials on Thursday eliminated almost 4% of the county's bus system by canceling or reducing service on 18 routes from the San Gabriel Valley to the South Bay. The cuts, which are the first major reductions in years for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, eliminate three Metro Local and five Metro Rapid bus lines and reduce service during weekdays and weekends on the remainder of...