Alameda Corridor Will Open On Time & Under Budget: Are the Lessons Learned Transferable

Jim, it's been a little over two years since Metro Investment Report has updated the progress on the Alameda Corridor project. As you near completion, give our readers a sense of the milestones that have been completed and what still needs to be finished before the project opens on April 15.

In the course of completing virtually the entire 20-mile length of the Alameda Corridor we had to remove 4 billion cubic yards of soil, relocate 3000 utilities and coordinate activity with almost all the city, county and regional entities along the corridor. And that was just on the construction side.

Additionally, we had to sign 17 separate construction contracts, train over 1000 corridor residents, 650 in trades in our regional pre-apprenticeship program, an additional 350 non-trade trainees, as well as employing and training over 400 at risk youth through the Alameda Core Conservation Corps.

Despite all of that, we are projecting that the project will come in under its budget and be completed slightly early. That is quite something considering the size and scope of this undertaking-probably the most complicated and highest valued construction project in the western United States.

Please remind our readers what the goal of the project was. Give us again the macro of why this project is important and what should follow on after the completion of this particular phase of it.

The Alameda Corridor represents the first attempt by the two ports to deal with their unique and common infrastructure needs in a coordinated fashion. It basically represents a new mindset, a new spirit of collaboration. If that cooperation was not there, the current and projected growth would be virtually impossible to retain and we would have nothing passing through these ports because of an overwhelming bottleneck. There are still things to be done and other kinds of infrastructure problems to be evaluated and successfully addressed, but this project is certainly the biggest and most promising step towards helping our ports remain a strong economic driver for the region.

And the trade through the ports is what? Is there an aggregate number?

Roughly one-quarter of all waterborne cargo arriving in the U.S. moves through the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles-the two busiest in the country. Together, the two ports are the third busiest in the world behind only Hong Kong and Singapore. Last year the ports handled more than $200 billion in cargo.

What other economic windfalls does this project represent for the region?

We effectively eliminated over 200 grade crossings where there was a conflict between automobiles and trains. Simply by doing that we have added countless hours which can now be put to productive use.

The Alameda Corridor also provided an incredible amount of environmental cleanup in terms of air quality. As we all know idling exhaust fumes-whether it be from trains or automobiles-create a tremendous amount of air pollution. By eliminating the need for that idling we're effectively making the air cleaner in the basin.

In terms of cargo shipments, we have created a faster and safer delivery mechanism for rail lines to transport products from the port to their final destination.

Now in digging the trench you ran into a number of runoff issues and environmental concerns. Can you elaborate on those challenges and how they were overcome?

Most of the trench is constructed beneath the water table, which means that we had to do a substantial amount of construction de-watering. Unfortunately, because of the natural geology along our route, the groundwater contains a number of trace metals in concentrations above the levels considered acceptable by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Because of those levels, the Water Replenishment Board did not want the water pumped back into the ground and the RWQCB did not want the water discharged into Compton Creek or Dominguez Channel.

That mandate presented us with some interesting challenges. How do we deal with this water if we are not able to put it back into the water table? Where can we transport the water? And generally the overall question was, what do we do with this water?

But in the end, because of a very dry winter, we were able to come to an understanding with the County Sanitation District and the RWQCB to allow us to de-water the trench at some crucial points during the construction process. And at the end of the day, there was cooperation from all of the agencies involved.

Are there lessons learned with respect to that for the next project like this?

If you're going to build a trench, you ought to talk with the requisite agencies and get some early buyoffs in terms of how you're going to handle the de-watering. Forging a partnership with the RWQCB and other agencies in the beginning is much better than trying to move forward on an adversarial basis.

Let's go back to the on time, on budget aspect that you referred to in your earlier comments about the project. Many of the criticisms of the infrastructure investments in the basin, from the MTA to the school district, have been that they were not on time or on budget. What are the lessons learned from the Alameda Corridor project that need to be translated?

The framework we devised to design and construct the most costly element of the Corridor-the mid-corridor trench-was successful because we transferred most of the risk to the contractor. We were able to use a design-build concept that eliminated finger pointing because the contractor had the responsibility for the design and construction. That was one of the major benefits of the project and certainly was an important lesson learned.

And the translation of this. You're well aware of the MTA's challenges. How would you, if you were sitting in that position, use the lessons learned from the Alameda Corridor for the MTA's agenda?

To the extent that it's possible to use the design-build concept, I would certainly encourage that agency to attempt to implement design-build before considering anything else. On almost any project, I would argue that design-build would significantly aid in the completion of the construction.

The LAEDC, L.A. County, the City of L.A. and others were involved in the Economic Summit right after Sept. 11th. They have recently held a press conference to report their findings and recommendations some of which focus on speeding up infrastructure investment in the basin. Given your experience with ACTA, do you have any thoughts on what can be done to get investments already in the pipeline realized so that we can incentivize badly needed infrastructure and job creation?

From my view, there are probably too many moving parts to gain the consensus necessary to speed up our infrastructure projects and investment. But, if we could determine what the priorities were for specific projects, decide which agency is best equipped to undertake those challenges and assign that particular project to a specific agency, that would be an enormous push toward realizing projects that have been funded and in the pipeline for years. That is what happens when you put a rational process to work. As a single purpose agency we were able to focus on a single project and I think that is an important aspect of our success.

That's one of the prime lessons I take away from the Alameda Corridor project. We implemented a rational process that was embraced by both the Board and the staff, all involved were committed to getting this project completed on time and under budget and, as a consequence, outside extraneous political issues never crept into the Alameda Corridor.

Can MTA take a lesson from ACTA?

I think that the MTA is making huge strides and I have every confidence that the new CEO will be able to take the agency to new heights. To suggest what the new CEO should or should not do at this point in his tenure is speculation. We need to give him time to get the lay of the land and determine his priorities.

Jim, you're about to be the Chair of the LAEDC. What ought to be the economic development agenda for this region for the next couple of years? What should be our highest priorities? And what must be done by LAEDC to rationalize and prioritize the region's "must do" agenda?

I'm a strong believer in business retention. I believe that the foundation for any economic development program starts with a very sound business retention program.

To complement that we need to do a great job of helping our industries export. The merger of the LAEDC with the World Trade Center Association will bring the resources of the both of the organizations into alignment and help to foster both of those principles.

Lastly, I really believe that if we had the finest K-12 educational system in the United States, we wouldn't have to implement any other economic development programs. Support for education and improving our educational system is the third leg of providing for this region's economic sustenance and growth.

You've also expressed yourself often in the many leadership positions you've had about the dysfunctional state/local fiscal relationship. There's a bill, AB 680, by Asm. Steinberg, moving through that is the first significant attempt at changing the formula for the allocation of local tax revenues. Do you have any comments on the status of efforts to reform the state/local financial relationship over the last decade?

That relationship has been a one-way street over the last decade. Simply stated, the state has taken the resources of municipalities and spent them. They've basically left cities and counties to fend for themselves. Only through a great deal of creativity have our local municipalities been able to cope and maintain municipal services. Certainly the entire fiscal relationship between the state and its local jurisdictions is totally dysfunctional.

That relationship is proving to be an enormous difficulty in financing and producing infrastructure projects as well. The two-thirds vote requirement imbedded in the Prop. 13 Constitutional revision has made local infrastructure projects incredibly difficult to get off the ground. That too must ultimately be revised if this state is going to move forward and plan for infrastructure effectively.

In light of that answer, Prop. 42 which will dedicate gas tax revenues specifically to transportation related uses has just passed. Do you have any thoughts on that proposition and its implications for this region?

Prop. 42 is an important piece of legislation. It's long overdue and it needs to be used effectively. But we shouldn't have needed to dedicate resources. The entire decision-making, priority-setting process of government should have been up to the task of seeing the necessity of infrastructure projects and planning accordingly. Obviously, that hasn't been the case. And in light of that, we need to do whatever we can to make it a priority. The tragic reality in setting these priorities is that the future has no vote.

And what's next for you, Jim?

We still have the Pacific Coast Highway grade separation to complete and construction for that will begin in September and will probably conclude in late 2003. After that, I really don't know. I'm going to evaluate my options.

There are some other regional transportation projects that we're looking at that are relatively creative and do solve a lot of problems. It may be that we are in the position to undertake those projects. If so I may stick around here for a little while longer. Or I may just retire. I haven't decided.