~~W. ~r

',,..y"

s -

_ a—

-- ~.-- .

t~. H"

p 4

.~ 2.

a

~

,

..~-

i~. eir

,,.

~.

i*~>t

.:;~

~ ..

~~~,

'b

v

1

~ ~.~~

1

- ~,1,

~,. Summary

.~;w..,..~~....,~y~

7...~

..,~..:..~irr:d: .x, t

':~

3~<le

.~~h~<xz:

..rt•,+

'- ..

Y.r.Y

~~> Y .

,~ „li

~.

~~}3.

~;~... r,.

...'

G

'~ ~

~J xr,rz

..

-~. v

':'~

..~

..

p.:r:

..:

:c

'~.

~

''

.`

~; ~

,~ .^a~i~

\x

~k

,.

~. ,'

~u ;.f••

"~ ,:If ±

.

„y~S~

i~

g+

i

':

~

~

~'

w; ;

:.

T'ty..

~

..~

... r

,..:.

,..,

..

>~~..

~i

'. _:

..

yr.

-

=~~ ~...,~....v X

x Yr

~Jk. ~~

1975

i

e. e. 3Y.'

'r~y.S :•?>~~ ;

...v4

F~egional TransportationN,.

rA.~,~

__r1

Plan ~.

,~x~.~.f,tH.~ .

`~o~~~d~::r:~.~~~

.~~~

~ CaJ

~ C~J~C~J~~~I~J

z~r

,;..J>>

~,

~ `l1r~~~~poP~~~ao~

.~~..~ .

._

i .;,....~~,

,

~''

_.__{

..,•. '

`i

~''%

•:::

`:;

:.`i...

~,

i

~ Southern California Association of G

overnments

it..I~..~~:._ ~~

c~

,'3

f i

~ k -yir8~.g

~'

~ ~

r~~ ~s

3~?p ~

s ~. f

a ~R

r

j

~y,

~ <

Xi,~

~,+~; ..:

~

:.

_v,

~.,a,-a

-~.

~~~,~

~~~~

~~~,~~.. ~-,

ti :'~ ~;~ ~~ SEA 4 6

2QA5

Sumr~nary

1975

Regional Transportatior~Plan~o~ar~~~

~c~~a~~por~~a~oo~~~~~~~

Southern California Association of Governments

fable of Contents

Introduction to the Plan

About SCAG

Historical Perspective

135

Major Issues and Recommendations

7

Subregional Transportation Plans 13

Updating the Plan

Public Participation

22

23

Southern California's transportation

systemwas founded on old missionary trails connect-

ing astring of missions firom Sonoma to S

an

Diego. Later these trails gave way to w

agon

roads linking hundreds of small towns. But

soon, stagecoach lines and then the railroads

opened the land to m

ore growth

and faster

travel for people and goods.

Red Car

The next 5

0 years s

aw a real estate b

oom and,

along with it, spectacular population growth.

As the Southland grew, so did the d

emand for

even better transportation. More automobiles

meant more and better roads to be built. But,

about the same time, the region's first inter-

urban transit system —commonly called the

Red Car —went into service, a

nd connected

cities with a relatively fast, reliable and inex-pensive m

eans of travel.

Support waned for public transit in the Thir-

ties, but during World War II —

when gasoline

was almost a

s scarce as n

ew automobiles —

people switched back to public transit. How-

ever, when Detroit

began producing

carsagain, and the g

overnment stopped rationing

gasoline, public transit became generally less

attractive.

Freeways

The Forties brought a n

ew form of high -speed

highway to Southern California —the freeway.

It was designed

to carry a large v

olume of

vehicles swiftly and

safely to their destina-tions. Today, m

ore than 1

,300 miles of such

freeways span the Southland.

An estimated 8

5 per cent of all families o

wn

one or m

ore cars, and they drive t

hem just

about everywhere throughout the region. In

1970, Southland

drivers logged

a total

ofabout 1

44 million miles a day.

r-

-,.,

.

-.~:„~

~~ ,

cJ

Car vs. B

us

Most people prefer to drive their cars rather

than ride

public transit, because their carstake t

hem where they w

ant to go, w

hen they

want to go, in comfort a

nd with relative speed.

It's been said that the Southland, especiallygreater Los Angeles, is the only place in thenation built to the exact specifications of theautomobile.

Although six times as much money is p

umped

into new highway construction a

s into public

transit in

Southern California,

governmentagencies have b

egun to d

o more, recently, to

assist local areas finance public transporta-tion systems.

Even so, bus service still provides less than

3 per cent of all

daily person trips (transit

serves mainly

downtown areas

and some

streets and freeways). M

ost people take buses

because they have no other choice. Surveysshow that a vast majority of people ride buses

because they can't drive, can't afford to, ordon't o

wn a car.

Transportation Lifeline

We know that transportation

is a lifeline of

Southern California. Nearly everyone depends

on it for e

mployment, education

and recre-

ation, and the exchange of goods a

nd ideas.

Because so m

uch in our lives d

epends on ac-

cess to jobs and other opportunities, it would

seem that there should be m

ore choice about

how to get around.

But in the opinion of many people there isn't.

Our transportation system has been described

by critics as inefficient, expensive, noisy, and

harmful tothe air and land.

Reappraise the System

Today, more than

10

Southern California

38,000 square miles.

million people

live in

spread across

over

How can

we increase the carrying capacity

of our

transportation network

and, at the

same time, have cleaner air,

better use

ofenergy a

nd resources, a

nd at a p

ace we can

afford?

Of ccurse, the answers are

not simple. Butone choice w

e have is to thoroughly reappraise

our entire

transportation system —

publictransit, highways, airports, g

oods movement,

bicycles, and harbors and

pipelines — so w

ecan

make better

use of it, now and in

thefuture.

10,000,000 people

the SCAG region

F~a

•

f:

~'

The SCAG transportation plan spells out w

hat

is needed to improve our regional transporta-

tion system in the near and distant future. A

series of recommendations are contained

in

the plan, in response to these critical issues:

air quality and energy, mobility a

nd accessi-

bility, land use, financing, changing technol-

ogy, institutional responsibility, and

phaseddecision- making.

Air Quality and Energy

One of Southern

California's most pressing

problems is air pollution. It's been shown to

be potentially dangerous to health and harm-

ful to the environment and economy. A major

cause of air pollution in the South Coast AirBasin

is the automobile. There is a

strong

chance that w

e will

never reach federal air

quality standards by simply adding smog con-

tr~l devices to the engines of today's cars. Two

otherthings must be done.

First, we must develop non

- polluting auto en-

gines and vehicles that can travel m

ore miles

per gallon. Improved auto performance in thefuture could be achieved by sanctions o

n the

size of the engines, enforcement of auto effi-ciency standards, development of electric pow-

ered vehicles and cleaner burning fuels.

7

0

Second, we must take steps to limit auto use.

Reducing the number of

miles we drive our

cars is one important key to cleaning u

p our'

air and, for that matter, making better use of

our energy. The plan calls for reducing the

number of miles traveled

by 20 per cent by

1977. A number of potential strategies are

recommended to achieve this reduction. T

hey

include:• Preferential treatment of buses andcarpools on freeways a

nd arterials

~ Traffic control i

mprovements

• Transit i

mprovements and carpool

action programs

• Parking m

anagement

• Commuter rail service

• Bicycle i

mprovements

t

~~~~ ~ r

,...~;

,~,`

~ ~

~:`

In addition, so called "disincentives" to auto

use are n

eeded if w

e are to "

see" clean air.

These could

include increasing the

cost of

auto operation through tax measures, and re-

strictingauto use in specified areas and times

of day.

The long t

erm effect of reducing auto use will

probably result

in inducing

people to

livecloser to work, increasing ridership o

n public

transit and/or

carpooling, reducing

certain

trips, and eliminating the n

eed for a s

econd

car.

Energy is a

n issue that is tied to the use of

the automobile.

Both the

number of

daily

miles that people

drive and the

gallons of

gasoline consumed have tripled over the last

20 years. Fuel shortages have m

ade us realize

that our energy supplies m

ay be too limited

to meet future

demands, unless

concerted

action is taken now to conserve w

hat we have

available.

Mobility and Accessibility

For those who own or have access to a car,

the Southland's major transportation system— freeways,

highways, roads and streets —

offers great mobility. However, many people

are not able to drive for various reasons.

Nearly one million persons in the S

CAG region

are over 65 years of age. M

any others are

handicapped or

disabled to

some degree.

These people are denied full mobility b

ecause

of barriers in vehicle design. High bus steps,

narrow aisles, electric doors, turnstyles and

stairs are examples of transit barriers.

Physical barriers are not the only obstacles.

In the SCAG region, a half million persons be-

tween the a

ges of 1

6 and 65 have incomes

below the poverty line. The costs of o

wning

and operating a car are s

o much that auto u

se

is beyond the reach of m

any of these people.

The result is that they are isolated f

rom jobs,

medical services, shopping areas a

nd social

events because of inadequate public transit.

SCAG believes that s

ome degree of mobility

and accessibiEity to

all citizens

is a public

obligation. But the w

ay in which this should

be accomplished is subject to debate. E

ven

so, the SCAG plan r

ecommends a n

umber of

things be

done in

the years a

head. Among

these recommendations are:

• Develop a "starter-leg" of a m

edium

capacity transit guidewayto be fully

operational within the next five years• Add at least 1

,900 buses to the region's

existing fleet~

Expand subscription b

us service w

here

needed

• Eliminate transit barriers to the hanu~-cappedand elderly

• Use park-a

nd-ride lots w

here possible

as transfer points for b

us riders

• Use marketing p

rograms to i

mprove the

image of public transit a

nd encourage

greater ridership• Improve access to existing airports to

handle future increases in commercial

and general airtravel

• Complete the missing links of the high-

way system a

nd improve major roads

• Promote greater use of bicycles, a

nd

encourage use of bike racks a

nd safe

'storage facilities at all major parkingareas

0

Land l9seIf growth

happens without a plan, it can

bedisorderly and wasteful. Valuable open landmay be lost, and the ecology of the area m

ay

be harmed. Another effect is scattered hous-ing and jobs around the region. T

he land use

pattern, through a lack of planning, becomes

haphazard and inefficient.

Transportation planning

is a basic tool for

achieving balanced development, since peoplelocate where jobs and services are accessibleand

industry locates where transport condi-tionsare favorable.

In view of this, SCAG has m

ade the following

specific land use recommendations:• Channel

transportation expansion

toareas of growth and redevelopment

• Emphasize metropolitan and shorter dis-tancetransportation improvements

• Support transit service at the c

ommunity

level• Encourage

transportation service

ap-propriate for rural areas

A• a

_. rye..

;

r

o

.,_ ..

~ ~ty,~

of r$, ~£

§nom

'~~,~y- i1s=~~ j:.~ T

"f.,._ ...

~., ~

-~e'~r

~~ t

:, r

~ :~tri'3rJp~

~ r.~ ~

""'_-~d° ~-^

~,~,-0 w s,

y^

r-

~,.R~_~a ~rt~r_.~.;~

--- alb

~~ra

.r6P" "

-

~:

'Y+ ,

~~ '~

~j! ~ S~~E'

r .~+,s

~.

~

~

.~..•~` ~w~

,o-

~'~ ~~ y~,~i~

~~r .

~

_ ,~~I _

~

'yam ~wi

Q~

rt~~~~;

~ +.

,;_ ,~~r

10

` ~~

`~,,~ w

.r

y~,

V

.~ ~., .:'yr

.',LL~X. ..~1' ~t~

FinancingImproving our regional transportation systemis very expensive. If the current proposals ofvarious focal, regional a

nd state agencies w

ere

carried out, the total price tag would run more

than $62 billion. O

nly about $36 billion

ofthat a

mcunt, however, is available for m

aking

transportation improvements over the next 2

0years.

Although these

funds are

available, many

have strings tied to them as to h

ow they c

an

be spent. T

he SCAG plan

says these con-

straints should be relaxed so that f

unds may

be used m

ore effectively.

In addition, it is recommended that the state

constitution be amended so that m

otor vehicle

tax revenues c

an be allocated

for any type

of highway or public transit improvement.

Changing Technology

Because transit h

as been a neglected part of

our transportation

system for

many years,

changes in both t

hetypeand operation of tran-

~ " x

r —~~~

~sit s

ystems have

been very slow

in coming.

Q

~~~However, because our technology is expand-

~~ ~`r'

F ~-=

ing so rapidly in all aspects of life, dramatic

~k~~ ~

~~'improvements in transit c

an be expected

in ~ ~~

'~~/

the near future.

if we use existing transit technology, w

e run

the risk

of developing

an obsolete

system.

But, at the same time, using a

n emerging but

unproven technology

runs an equally

greatrisk of developing a

system which

may not

function properly.

Therefore, SCAG recommends that decisions

~/~' "`+' V"~' ;

"'",~~,

should be m

ade so that technological break-

throughs can be made part of future plans.

~'

l

Phased Decision- PJlaking

Not only is technology changing, but our totalenvironment can also c

hange rapidly. Air qual-

ity and energy problems are e

xamples of this.

Therefore, our

decisions must be

flexibleenough to be able to respond quickly to chang-

ingconditions.

We should not choose an irrevocable path of

action unless there is a

high degree of cer-tainty about the effects of that action. It isdesirable, then, to

make decisions in

a se-

quence, so that actions needed now are taken

now, but options are left o

pen for the future..

SCAG aims for the phasing of decisions o

nnew transit services over the

next year, in-ciuding the priorities of service, selection ofmode and funding.

Institutional ResponsibilityIn a time w

hen numerous transportation de-

cisions must be m

ade, the region is faced with

a fragmented

system of

responsibility for

making those

decisions. Unlike

past trans-portation

actions which

generally involved

only a few agencies or levels of government,

today's transportation

decision- making

re-

sponsibility is shared by many agencies a

nd

levels of government.

It is necessary to provide a framework within

which regional decisions can

be made, and

which can respond to local needs as well a

s

state and federal mandates. T

he institutional

arrangements which may improve the

situ-

ation may take o

ne of several forms, ranging

from relatively simple interagency agreements

to complete restructuring agencies a

nd re-

sponsibilities.

It is r

ecommended that the

regional trans-portation

plan be

updated, as required

by

state legislation, and that m

ore time for public

review and comment be

provided. This up-datingprocess i

snow underway.

~f

8

>'))~),»~

~ ~;i3~~,

,~~ ~~. ~ ~ 1~,~ ~ ,~~ ~ ,

»~~~ ~ ~~.~ ~ ~>3~~ ~~~

I~ y~~~~ ~,~,~

i a ~ u))~ :~l))Y.. ~ ~ ~ c

~~ ~ .: >j ~~ , ~3~33 ~> ~ ~ .,>>>~

~~ ~~b,~~ ~ ~ ,~,~~~ \ ~ ~ >

1

~~ -~~~~~q~ ~,_,,~ ~.,. ~

~.,~~o ~~ ~ ~ ~~~',,~~ ~..3~~~ ~~'~ ~ a>>''~ ~~ '~

~~ ~ ~ ~

'~ ~~,? ~~ ,t~~:,

~ z ~,i > ~"ti,~

*l1`h ~~ t ~

~.: J

,~ Y~~~

~ ;~g ~ ~ ~ _~1, d 3 ~•

~~~i ~~>>, ,~„f~,,~

~ ~ \ rt:

• • •

r

_ ~ ~

~

~'`i

In addition to the regional-level recommenda-

tions, each subregion submitted

recommen-

dations to

be included

in the

plan. These

recommendations outline the transportation

improvements each subregion plans to imple-

ment over the next f

ew years. T

hey indicate

the directions subregions are taking in orderto solvetransportationproblems intheir areas.

To date, subregional plans a

nd/or other state-

ments of

policy have

been received

from

Orange County (including O

CTD), Riverside

County (including the Coachella Valley Asso-

ciation of Governments), San Bernardino As-

sociated Governments, Ventura C

ounty Asso-

ciation of

Governments, Imperial

ValleyAssociation

of Governments, Southern

Cali-fornia

Rapid Transit District, city of Los An-geles, a

nd county of L

os Angeles. Subregional

plans are being developed and will be part of

next year's update of the regional transporta-tion

plan.

The following is a s

ummary of the major sub-

regional recommendations and policies:

13

14

For highways in the county, it is recommended

that the current master plan of highways be

retained —subject to s

ome changes that are

based on more study.

These arterials

areplanned to handle present a

nd future traffic

loads, in line with adopted county goals and

policies. Dial-a -ride service is called for in anumber of

cities. These include:

Orange,

Huntington Beach, Buena Park, Brea, West-

minster, Tustin and nearby foothills, Cypress,

La Palma and Fullerton.

Long range planning for a rapid transit guide-

way, based o

n adopted corridors, is also rec-

ommended.

And, for air travel, further

airport study is

called for by the county. This study will lead

to solving key environmental problems, such

as aircraft noise.

~.-me,~.__

.~

,..:~~~

rr=-=

A five-year program to develop transit service

is proposed

for each

of four areas

in the

county.

Under this

program, the city

of Riverside

would have

seven regular

bus routes, five

small buses for subscription service, and dial-

a-ride for three areas. In Corona a

nd Norco,

dial-a-ride buses would

run on the

hour as

would fixed-route buses. Proposed for

Ban-ningand Beaumont is an intercity bus system

of three routes, with

future connections toRiverside a

nd Palm Springs. Dial-a-ride a

nd

regular bus service are proposed for H

emet-

San Jacinto, Perris -Sun City, a

nd Lake Elsi-

nore. New buses a

nd expanded service are

proposed for the Coachella Valley as well asthe Blythe-Palo Verde Valley.

~~~

~~ ~ ~?..

1 y

c"

_ ~<

~--___--

~~~-~~ ~ '~

r ~

~ ~ ~

.~ ;~

~

-, ~

,..~ ~ ;

_~

~~ '~~~

,~.

15

San Bernardino

Associated Governments

16

Several transit systems are r

ecommended f~

detailed testing to determine their costs and

impact on the county. Included are: b

uses on

freeways and streets, separate

right -of-wayrapid

transit, automated small

vehicle sys-

tems, commuter railroads,

and

dial-a-ridesystems.

Also called for is a five-year short range tran-sit i

mprovement program to e

xpand existing

bus service

and inaugurate

new service

tovarious c

ommunities. This p

rogram also in-

cludes the start of dial-a-ride service in thewest valley

and the

mountain

-desert areas,commuter railroad service, a

nd pool-type tran-

sit services.

A federally-aided

five-year capital

improve-ment program and aone-year county f

unded

program for h

ighways have been r

ecommend-

ed for the county.

:•..:,

_ ,:

~K

-gym9~,..~. ~., ~.

.. ... .:: -,...

~~ ... . ~

.r ~'

tcr!:x~':t:''_t::<

•

~ ~ •

A fixed-route

bus system, to

be developed

over the next five years, is recommended to

serve communities in the county, as well asthose in Los Angeles a

nd Santa Barbara coun-

ties. Carpooling should be encouraged by lo-cal agencies a

nd businesses, using various

incentives. Intercity rail service should

alsobe considered as a potential system over thenext five years.

The existing

streets and highway

systemshould

continue to be

properly maintained

and expanded to

serve projected

needs. Itis

recommended that three

county airportsshould continue to operate, except for futuremodifications

which may be

needed. These

are: Santa Paula Airport, Ventura County Air-port in Oxnard, a

nd the Point M

ugu Naval Air

Station.

17

.; ::

~8

IVAG calls for a transportation s

ystem based

on citizen

desires for travel to employment

and other activities at a reasonable cost. This

system should have a network of streets a

nd

highways that provide

rapid, efficient, com-

fortableand safe travel for people and goods.

In addition, it should guide and promote effi-

cient growth and land use patterns, a

s well a

sserve agricultural

needs. For airports, there

_should be a system capable of handling futuregrowth a

nd compatible with other m

odes of

^"`:,"travel

r

a

SCRTD recommends a program of short-range

bus service

improvements, with

a goal

of1,000 additional

buses within

a three

yearperiod. T

hese and other b

uses will b

e used for

three general types of service. First, there will

be freeway or line-haul

runs, having limitedstops in order to s

peed travel for riders, a

nd

in many cases use of park

-and-ride lots. Sec-

ond, there

will be bus improvements for

shorter trips. Third, there will be better b

us

service in local areas.

The ultimate goal for rapid transit is a

240-

mile master plan of corridors. Within this plan,

SCRTD has adopted a 145-mile

initial pro-

gram for g

uideway construction, along with

an extension of the EI

Monte Busway to the

Ontario Airport. A system of this size c

annot

be constructed all at once, so priorities will

have to be set for proper phasing of the sys-tem.

The exact location of the rapid transit lines

and stations, which portions should b

e in sub-

way, at grade or elevated, a

nd what technol-

ogy should

be used a

nd operated, have

notyet been decided. T

hese decisions await pre-

liminary engineering, environmental impact

reports and public hearings for e

ach route.

~ ~n~`. ilk

City of Los Angeles

20

For freeways, the city calls for priorities in

construction and improvement to reduce ve-

hicle miles traveled and relieve traffic conges-

tion. Streets

and highways

should be im-

proved in accordance with the city's five-yearplan.

The city

is recommending the d

evelopment

of a rapid transit system, including auxiliarynetworks

in major

centers and feeder

bus

service where needed.

Improved bus service also is called for by in-

creasing routes, efficiency and comfort. Other

proposals include an exclusive b

usway within

freeways, new routes to reduce transfers a

nd

! ~I

^.,"

~

JS

'~.

{

~ ~i

a. ~~" ,

~4ys~ar

encourage ridership, separate loading areas

in heavy traffic a

nd bus stops in

more con-

venient locations, and preferential use of se-

lected streets during peak travel times.

Adequate ground access to airports should be

provided, and remote passenger ticketing a

nd

baggage handling are needed. A

nd air cargo

facilities should be e

xpanded in s

ome cases.

It is recommended there be continued devel-

opment of the Port of L

os Angeles to increase

its capacity. In addition, rail service through-out the city should

be consolidated and im-

proved to meet industrial d

emand.

_ ..: ~.T. v ..

~

_~.._-

- _

try.. .3Y~_ t

—

- ~~

-~:~W

-Y

(~,'

~

~-~.~

r ~

~

i,

~~; , ~

~ ̀ ~"

k- `

~ '; ~,

. ~~

4 t'"

n3

ice. f

l

},

~~

~1

y

Transportation and Utilities C

ommittee

Ralph B. Clark (Chairman)

Don Fox

Dorothy Le Conte

Hazel N. ScottoSupervisor,

Mayor Pro T

em,

Councilwoman,

Councilwoman,Orange County

City of BreaCity of Rolling Hills

City of Downey

Eric A. Haley (Vice Chairman)

Mary R. Gayle

Luis M. Legaspi

Wil SimendingerCouncilman,

Councilwoman,

Supervisor,Mayor Pro T

em,

City of RiversideCity of Camarillo

Imperial CountyCity of La Mirada

Archie E. BeasorCharles E. Gilb

Jay E. LewisRenee Simon

Councilman,Mayor,

Councilman,Councilwoman,

City of Santa Fe SpringsCity of Arcadia

City of PalmdaleCity of L

ong Beach

David BrandtKenneth H

ahn

William J. LoehrWalter R. Tucker

Councilman,Supervisor,

Vice Mayor,Councilman,

City of Santa Ana

Los Angeles CountyCity of Pico Rivera

City of Compton

Forrest W. Carter

Jo Heckman

Donald D. LorenzenHoward C. Ullrich

Councilman,Councilwoman,

Councilman,Director,

City of Desert Hot Springs

City of Pasadena

City of Los AngelesCaltrans

Kent Cozad

Andrew Isaacs

Daniel D. Mikesell

Robin Young

Councilman,Councilman,

Supervisor,Mayor Pro T

em,

City of Hemet

City of InglewoodSan Bernardino County

City of La Habra

Jesse M. Davis

Edwin A. Jones

Stephen A. NordeckJohn Z

immerman

Councilman,Supervisor,

Mayor,Councilman,

City of Buena Park

Ventura County

City of Manhattan BeachCity of Norwalk

Anthony B. Decou

Miriam Kaywood

Peter F. Schabarum

Councilman,Councilwoman,

Supervisor,City of R

edondo Beach

City of Anaheim

Los Angeles County

Elerth EricksonBernard W

. Keller

Donald L. SchroederCouncilman,

Councilman,Supervisor,

City of Garden GroveCity of Barstow

Riverside County

SLAG Officers

PresidentFirst Vice President

James Hayes

Rosanna Scott

Supervisor,Councilwoman,

County of Los AngelesCity of Riverside

Second Vice President

Past PresidentDennis Hansberger

Jarvey GilbertSupervisor,

Councilman,County of S

an Bernardino

City of Burbank

Professional StaffExecutive Director —

Raymond Remy

Deputy Executive Director —Bart Meays

Director of Planning —Edward A. Holden

Director of Transportation Planning — W. 0. Ackermann, Jr.

The preparation of this report w

as financed in

part through a grant from the U.S. Departmentof Transportation; U

rban Mass Transportation

Administration, the Federal Highway Adminis-

tration, and the State of California.

x.Y

_ r

., a

'.~ alt

MTA llORO THY

GRAY LIBRARY & RRCHIUE

1~0~0~378875