The year was 1949. Then Governor Earl Warren signed legislation designating the northern half of the Long Beach Freeway. Returning G.I.s were impressed with Nazi Germany's advanced autobahns. National goals were established and we moved into the "Era of the Interstate". The Los Angeles Basin was planned for a criss-crossing freeway system, leaving no community less than a few miles from a freeway.

The crest of the freeway construction is now behind us; the vision that we could rely on freeways is outdated. Instead, the region is slowly recognizing the importance of our "multi-modal" transportation future. Now, the vision of the Interstate Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) embraces the principals that existing freeways should be made more efficient for cars, buses and van pools, that light rail and mass transportation can move people, and that the region's freight can move by rail.

Changing Regional Priorities

It is clear that Federal funding will combine with changing regional priorities to drive our "multi-modal" future, a future that recognizes that we can no longer rely on just the freeways for seving the economy of the region. Indeed, the new transportation philosophy recognizes that our region's needs are best served by an interwoven network of subways, commuter rail, light rail, expanded bus systems, car and van pools, and railroads moving containers.

Background: Entangled in the Past

Even as we reach to the future, we are a region entangled in the accepted practices of the past. A good example of this phenomenon at work is the situation resulting from planning done years ago for the twin ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. Without a doubt, the planners of these two powerful regional resources underestimated the tremendous impacts of their development.

From the 1940s to the 1980s, our region had a broad industrial base which concentrated on building cars, planes, and goods. But in the late '80s, our region began a transition to a different sort of economy. This more recent "post-Industrial phase", unlike its predecessor, now relies heavily on converting idle manufacturing areas into warehousing and distribution centers. This transition has been occuring now for a decade in communities like South Gate, Carson, Commerce and Downey.

For the twin ports, which are gigantic economic engines and modern in their facilities, the effects of this shift are evident in the overburdened freeways, local streets, and rail that attempt to serve them daily. This situation is a tangled mismatch and, with growth for the ports anticipated to be over 200 percent in this decade, it could only get worse.

Regional Reason One: The Alameda Corridor Project

Enter the Alameda Corridor Project, recently listed as the "foremost infrastructure improvement project" in California. This project will, in short, untangle the transportation mess surrounding our ports. It will dedicate and improve existing rail connections to the ports to handle containerized freight. The project will generate 5,000 construction-related jobs, create 700,000 permanent port-related jobs in our 5-county area, and $69 billion in annual sales revenues are expected.

Regional Reason Two: Smog, the ISTEA Vision, and South Pasadena

As exciting as its implications are for the Alameda Corridor, ISTEA's vision includes South Pasadena as well. ISTEA is backed by the Clean Air Act. Last amended in 1990, the act applies tough air pollution standards to the nation's dirtiest air basin.

The proposed 710 freeway extension will not comply with the new air standards as both local and regional air quality decline. Caltrans projects that the freeway will draw 120,000 vehicles into our area, on top of the 100,000 vehicles each day from this area. ISTEA funding for the 710 extension will be prohibited, since freeway expansions do not comply with the Air Act.

Regional Reason Three: Future Shock -- Funding Famine

Just as the region begins to embrace a "multi-modal" future, we are faced with "funding famine" of staggering proportions. Federal and State funds are being outstripped by crumbling infrastructure, new demands and large deficits. During the 1980s, California grew by 800,000 people a year, with the related costs to society. The recession "slowed" California's growth last year (1992) to "only" 600,000 people.

The California Transportation Commission assigns the Alameda Corridor a top State priority. The Corridor is also the most important "under-funded" project in the region. The estimated costs are $1.3 billion, with funding for only $137 million. This imbalance reflects the nature of "funding famine" and the historic inability of the region to properly prioritize competing needs.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission will attempt to set priorities straight by examining the 30-Year Transportation Plan, adopted in 1989. The 30-Year Plan guides the massive $183 billion transportation investment. Based on rosy financial projections and failed transportation bond issues, the 30-Year Plan is now $20 billion short of its goal. The plan falls short $650,000 this year alone as costs continue to grow.

Meanwhile, our regional transportation needs are overwhelmed by the needs of the State of California. The state's Transportation Improvement Program is $4 billion behind this year; the California Transportation Commission now reports that $3,8 billion is necessary for freeway rehabilitation in the next 10 years because the freeways have exceeded their 30-year design life expectancy. There is also a backlog of $300 million in freeway noise walls, last prioritized in 1989. Finally, Caltrans is critically behind in seismic freeway upgrades and has no source of funding for $800 million in seismic strengthening for California's toll bridges.

The Bottom Line: "High Uncertainty"

Due in part to the funding famine and the 40-year fight over the 710 Freeway, the California Transportation Commission has identified the 710 as a project with "high uncertainty". The Commission reported to the Governor in 1993 that it is one of the more than 29 "high cost" projects statewide, and that funding for it will take many decades. Because freeway funding is allocated in 7-year cycles, the multi-year funding proposed for the freeway extension will eclipse the project to 2015 and for decades beyond. Property acquisition and relocation of residents will take five to 10 years, when funding becomes available. Construction will conservatively take 10 years, after clearing the corridor. The Commission concluded that "progress and full funding packages remain uncertain" for the Long Beach Freeway extension.

Conclusion: Instead, a Multi-Modal Future ... Over Time

Meanwhile, the Blue Line light rail project will be operatinal in 1998 (hah!) and I will ride it long before any projected completion of the 710 extension.

Our region's multi-modal future is at hand. From our ports to our valleys, the shift is underway.