LOS ANGELES | Transportation News & Discussion

[SoCalKid]

Originally Posted by bzcat

Many of us have already voiced our support for Concept 4. The branch design will allow Van Nuys to stay at 5 min head way and provide thru-service to transit users on the Van Nuys corridor. The 2nd branch heading west on Orange line ROW will connect West SFV to the Sepulveda Pass line and double up freuency from Orange line to purple line where the demand is highest. Win-win for the the whole SFV.

Can someone explain how the branched service would interface with the eventual orange line conversion? Would we have a east-west line running from Warner Center to NOHO, with the Supulveda branch terminating underground to create a transfer at Supulveda station? Or would this branch somehow link to the future Orange Line light rail?

[Illithid Dude]

The Orange Line will never interface with the Sepulveda Line. Later this year a bridge will be built over Van Nuys, grade separating The Orange Line from the street. The bridge is being designed with the Van Nuys light rail line in mind, where one can walk down from the bridge to the light rail station. Despite this, the two don't connect, and will never connect. One will never influence the other, and the Sepulveda line will not precipitate an Orange Line light rail conversion. The Orange Line should not be taken in to account when considering what option the Sepulveda Line should take.

[SoCalKid]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

The Orange Line will never interface with the Sepulveda Line. Later this year a bridge will be built over Van Nuys, grade separating The Orange Line from the street. The bridge is being designed with the Van Nuys light rail line in mind, where one can walk down from the bridge to the light rail station. Despite this, the two don't connect, and will never connect. One will never influence the other, and the Sepulveda line will not precipitate an Orange Line light rail conversion. The Orange Line should not be taken in to account when considering what option the Sepulveda Line should take.

Got it. So it sounds like the purpose of branching to Sepulveda would really just be to create a turnback, allowing for higher frequencies on the Supulveda line than the Van Nuys line. Is that right?

[numble]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

The Orange Line will never interface with the Sepulveda Line. Later this year a bridge will be built over Van Nuys, grade separating The Orange Line from the street. The bridge is being designed with the Van Nuys light rail line in mind, where one can walk down from the bridge to the light rail station. Despite this, the two don't connect, and will never connect. One will never influence the other, and the Sepulveda line will not precipitate an Orange Line light rail conversion. The Orange Line should not be taken in to account when considering what option the Sepulveda Line should take.

Concept 4 envisions the Sepulveda Line with one branch continuing north on the Van Nuys Line and a second branch towards the Sepulveda Orange Line station (not connecting with the Van Nuys station) via an aerial alignment. It creates the opportunity for 2 North-South lines (Orange Line west of Sepulveda is both North-South and East-West) feeding into the Sepulveda Line. The conversion of the rest of the Orange Line could create a East-West Line from the Van Nuys station to Pasadena (or continue to Montclair).

Originally Posted by SoCalKid

Got it. So it sounds like the purpose of branching to Sepulveda would really just be to create a turnback, allowing for higher frequencies on the Supulveda line than the Van Nuys line. Is that right?

It’s really doubtful they would spend money on 1 mile of aerial alignment just for a turnback facility. Concept 3 says they can accomplish a turnback at Van Nuys station.

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

It's almost like building a light-rail system that functions more like commuter rail directly next to an existing commuter rail line is a poor investment.

Not if it induces more riders and gets more people out of cars, which isn’t that what a lot of posters here want? If you don’t know by now, I’m pro car. But I do support transit options for people and it isn’t like this extension is an attempt to give the foothills the same transit options as you’d expect downtown. So I don’t see the problem. The commuter rail line, hopefully will eventually made HSR to San Bernardino.

There’s a lot of people in the foothills. I want to see the 210 expanded to double its current capacity. Realistically, that is not happening any time soon. Gold line extension helps give people an alternative to a freeway that is heavily congested and won’t see further expansion for the time being due to current political climate.

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by SoCalKid

Do you actually believe that the density in the San Dimas-Claremont area produces enough sales tax to pay for the "investment" in a second rail corridor in this area? More so than in the heart of urban LA? Because that's just silly.

I believe they contribute to the sales tax and they deserve a bone thrown at them. That is more than just a new bus route or expanded bus frequency.

What rail corridor in DTLA pays for itself? Because if your only argument is that DTLA lines have higher ridership, than that’s just silly and no reason to expand rail out into the suburban areas which deserve an alternative other than commuter rail and freeways. You’re acting like giving them light rail will give them mass transit you’d expect in NYC.

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by LineDrive

This will forever blow my mind. I don’t care WHAT the excuses are.

The state budget is what, $183B? How much would it cost to turn the Van Nuys line from LRT to HRT? $3B maybe? The state couldn’t throw in $1B or $2B for the next couple of years for a project that will transform the states flagship city? And that’s just the state, then the county and Metro itself could throw in money. Who knows what they could get in grants. And then what about private partnerships?

LRT from Sylmar to Ventura and then HRT from Ventura to LAX reeks of the kind of disorganized public transit planning that has made LA mass transit a joke. That’s a couple of lines that will be used but woefully under its potential, leading to billions in changes 10-20 years down the road.

Meanwhile a Heavy Rail line from Sylmar to UCLA, Expo, LAX and ending at Inglewood Stadium would be probably one of the most heavily used Subway lines in the world outside of Asia. It would be Efficient. It would be incredible. It would be world class.

(Hell, honestly if costs are so prohibitive - I sincerely think the valley would be better off with a HRT line that extends half of the original plan: Say maybe as far as the MetroLink station? and connects to the Sepulveda line to be one continuous line ... that’s a far better option that a LRT line that goes all the way to Sylmar but forces a transfer to a HRT line at Sepulveda

Get it together Los Angeles. The stubbornness, the narrow mindedness and pure idiocy of Metro is gonna rob LA of what could be a truly world class system.

Completely agree. Metro is setting this corridor up to fail if they aren’t careful which will have severe consequences going forward for future bond proposals.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by plutonicpanda

Completely agree. Metro is setting this corridor up to fail if they aren’t careful which will have severe consequences going forward for future bond proposals.

Metro has been doing great work delivering projects relatively on time and on budget while taking in what the citizens want and applying it. People of the valley wanted surface rail and even put a legal block on metro from building any heavy rail subway in its jurisdiction... hence the orange line. They are building the system that the citizens demanded in the 2000’s, but citizen demand is shifting quite rapidly.... Metro’s plans have yet to get ahead of this shift though.

This is happening with the West Santa Ana Branch corridor. Citizen demand is transforming this project into a 3/4 grade separated Light Rail as the people demand more and more sections be grade separated. The new estimated cost is now about $5 Billion. That’s now $1,000,000,000.00 OVER the BUDGET Metro has allocated to it from Measure M. We gotta get ahead of this otherwise we will have maxed out all our money and have a system not meeting the demands

[numble]

Various notes from browsing through Metro documents.

The agenda for the Bus Operations Subcommittee gives a preview of upcoming board actions.
http://media.metro.net/about_us/comm..._2018-0717.pdf
Green Line moving to EIS/EIR phase
According to page 18, the draft Metro Planning and Programming agenda for July 2018 included an item to move the Green Line extension to the EIS/EIR phase, with Alternatives 1 & 3 to move forward (though they want to modify each alternative to remove a station).

A RECEIVING AND FILING the Green Line Extension to Torrance Supplemental Alternative Analysis (SAA) Report.

AUTHORIZING staff to initiate the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Project and carry forward the following two build alternatives (modified):
a. Alternative 1: Metro Right-of-way (ROW) and Overcrossing, without a station at Manhattan/Inglewood
b. Alternative 3: Hawthorne to 1 90th Street, without a station at Hawthorne/166th Street.

Union Station - Above Grade Concourse Recommended for Run-Through Project

APPROVE staff's recommendation on the CEQA "Proposed Project" in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). Staff is recommending that Alternative 1 , the Multimodal Transit Alternative of up to 1 0 run-through tracks with shared tracks, and with the above-grade passenger concourse option, as the CEQA Proposed Project.

The quarterly report from the Office of Extraordinary Innovation also has some interesting items.
https://lametro.nextrequest.com/docu...42283/download

The WSAB and Sepulveda P3s seem to be moving along and their status is in the report. These other items caught my attention:

P3 Proposal for Vermont Ave advanced to Phase 2
The P3 proposal for the Vermont Transit Corridor project has advanced to a Phase 2 review:

Vermont Avenue Transit Corridor: Metro has recommended advancement of an Unsolicited Proposal for innovative design and delivery of the Vermont Avenue Transit Corridor project to a Phase II evaluation, which was approved by the CEO. The proposal suggests a P3 structure to deliver a Bus Rapid Transit Line with next-generation technology enhancements to improve project performance and user experience, while minimizing cost and risk. OEI is working with the project team to better define the value proposition in the UP, develop an evaluation methodology, and compile a scope of additional required information for the Proposer to support the Phase II Detailed Evaluation process.

P3 Evaluation of East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor
Metro is evaluating the feasibility of delivering the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor as a P3:

East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor: Based on an internal staff recommendation approved by the CEO, Metro has initiated a qualitative P3 assessment of the East San Fernando Valley Transit LRT project. Metro recently completed draft qualitative analysis, and is currently incorporating Project Team comments. Once the qualitative assessment is completed, the analysis will be presented to the CEO with a recommendation for next steps.

P3 Proposal for South Bay ExpressLanes
Metro has received a P3 proposal from ROADIS for the P3 delivery of a countywide ExpressLanes/Express Bus network:

ROADIS:Metro is finalizing the evaluation of an Unsolicited Proposal for P3 delivery of a countywide network of joint High-Occupancy Toll/Express Bus Lanes running on major highways by ROADIS, an international company that participates in the development, operation and management of highway concessions, to a Phase II evaluation. The evaluation will consider the potential benefits of such a P3, alongside the extent to which the proposal could have an impact on the ExpressLanes system financing plan.

The summary of this proposal in the "Unsolicited Proposal Status Log" describes the proposal as "A triangle of bus and toll lanes in the South Bay."

[Illithid Dude]

Metro choosing the above grade concourse, widely considered to be the worst option? I'm shocked.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

Metro choosing the above grade concourse, widely considered to be the worst option? I'm shocked.

Everything always boils down to politics and cost savings.

[numble]

Elon Musk's Boring Company has now proposed a "Dugout Loop", a tunnel between East Hollywood (with a branch to a Red Line station) and Dodger Stadium, tunneling under Sunset Blvd. They are also exploring building a tunnel between the Purple and Expo lines.
https://www.boringcompany.com/dugout

Dugout Loop will begin at the Dodger Stadium property and will proceed under Vin Scully Avenue and Sunset Boulevard. The western terminus will be located on private property owned by The Boring Company and will be located within the vicinity of a Metro Red Line station.

There are three Metro Red Line stations located in the vicinity of the western terminus that will be evaluated in the review process for the proposed project: Vermont/Sunset Station, Vermont/Santa Monica Station, and Vermont/Beverly Station. See map below. Only one of the three station options will be selected.

...

As part of the CEQA process, the Initial Study (IS) and Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Dugout Loop process will be available for public review from August 16, 2018 to September 17, 2018. A public scoping meeting will be held at Dodger Stadium, 1000 Vin Scully Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90012, on August 28, 2018 from 6:15 pm to 9:00 pm. Please visit LABOE’s website for more information on the location and availability of the IS for public review. For more information on the location and availability of the IS for public review, please visit LABOE’s website at: http://eng.lacity.org/dugout-loop.

...

Previously, The Boring Company proposed a test tunnel under Sepulveda as a proof of concept for tunneling in Los Angeles. However, this test tunnel proposal did not include passenger operations and included only one surface terminal (as opposed to two). The Boring Company has made technical progress much faster than expected and has decided to make its first tunnel in Los Angeles an operational one, hence Dugout Loop!

The Boring Company is excited to build useful public transportation tunnels in Los Angeles, including by Sepulveda, and is exploring concepts for potential future alignments. One initial conceptual idea is a tunnel connection between Metro’s Purple and Expo lines.

[Quixote]

I know people are skeptical and see it as total pie in the sky, but this is really our only chance of ever seeing some sort of express rapid transit (the proverbial 3rd and 4th tracks) built. The Dugout Loop concept is essentially a combo HRT/PRT localized high-speed rail, not a neighborhood-serving service. This isn’t a substitute for a Metro line down Santa Monica/Sunset.

[BrownTown]

Originally Posted by Quixote

I know people are skeptical and see it as total pie in the sky, but this is really our only chance of ever seeing some sort of express rapid transit (the proverbial 3rd and 4th tracks) built. The Dugout Loop concept is essentially a combo HRT/PRT localized high-speed rail, not a neighborhood-serving service. This isn’t a substitute for a Metro line down Santa Monica/Sunset.

Anyone can draw lines on a map, actually getting stuff done is a whole other story.

[bzcat]

Big Blue Bus is gathering public input on network changes after Crenshaw line opens. The big change is its plan to extend Line 14 from Playa Vista to Inglewood (Florence/Hindry station) - I call it the "BBB to Randy's Donut" route.

Also very sensible recommendation to shorten Line 3 and Rapid 3 to Century/Aviation station rather than the current Imperial/Aviation terminus.

Another seemingly long overdue change is wholesale gutting of Rapid 10 freeway service to Downtown LA, which has suffered abysmal ridership drops after Expo line opened.

But there are some troubling proposals, including eliminating Rapid buses on Pico (R7) and Lincoln (R3) on weekends and turning most low ridership feeder bus to Expo on weekends to "rideshare on demand" service.

Take the survey here and give them your comment: https://www.bigbluebus.com/Newsroom/...aspx?type=News

[202_Cyclist]

It smelled like Lou-dog inside the streetcar...

OCTA is seeking public input on how the OC Streetcar vehicles should look


By LILLY NGUYEN
Aug. 28, 2018
OC Register


A rendering of one of the designs being considered for the electric vehicles that would be used by the OC Streetcar. (Image courtesy of the Orange County Register)

"Three variations of orange, white and blue paint schemes are being considered for Orange County’s first streetcar system.

Board members of the Orange County Transportation Authority got a look on Monday at four proposed designs for the $400 million OC Streetcar that is expected to be running in Santa Ana and Garden Grove by 2021..."

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/08/2...s-should-look/

[hughfb3]

Hello Forumers,

We are up to some big stuff and its going to be fun. Join us in our quest to help Metro Save $6 Billion on the Sepulveda pass, educate the populace about Linear Induction Motors for transit, avoid tunneling through pass, and allow savings to build other much needed lines. We've recently had meetings with high level officials in Metro and community transit organizations in SoCal. We are ready to grow and are looking for amazing, inspired individuals to join us in the cause to...

1. Educate and enroll the county to go over the pass rather than tunnel under using LIM technology
2. Use Savings to fund LAX-DTLA local/express service via Harbor sub and Prairie ave in Inglewood accessing new stadiums and housing development.
3. Build Crenshaw to Hollywood and give Weho its own brand new rail line

For more info and To RSVP click "Join the Campaign" @ www.thehyrail.org

Click for Info on LIM technology from Bombardier report showcasing Vancouver Skytrain technology

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

Metro has been doing great work delivering projects relatively on time and on budget while taking in what the citizens want and applying it. People of the valley wanted surface rail and even put a legal block on metro from building any heavy rail subway in its jurisdiction... hence the orange line. They are building the system that the citizens demanded in the 2000’s, but citizen demand is shifting quite rapidly.... Metro’s plans have yet to get ahead of this shift though.

This is happening with the West Santa Ana Branch corridor. Citizen demand is transforming this project into a 3/4 grade separated Light Rail as the people demand more and more sections be grade separated. The new estimated cost is now about $5 Billion. That’s now $1,000,000,000.00 OVER the BUDGET Metro has allocated to it from Measure M. We gotta get ahead of this otherwise we will have maxed out all our money and have a system not meeting the demands

Good points! Thank you for the information regarding the valley residents desires.

It is important that we build these things right and show people that these lines have the opportunity to rival cars which would increase ridership. That means quality over quantity. While I want to see the system expanded, I would rather see Metro fix what have first bringing expanded operating hours, increased frequencies, and fixing the horrible bus service with adequate shelters.

That all falls in line with new capital projects ensuring they are built the right way so more money isn't needed later that could otherwise be spent expanded the system at that point. If its done right and gets people to point a to point b as quickly as possible and safely(increasing security), then it will be easier to get said projects done as public opinion will be more favorable than it is now getting more cars off the road reducing congestion and thus increasing the view of those who don't want to use it at all(suburbanites mostly) and getting their vote.

[numble]

Originally Posted by plutonicpanda

Good points! Thank you for the information regarding the valley residents desires.

It is important that we build these things right and show people that these lines have the opportunity to rival cars which would increase ridership. That means quality over quantity. While I want to see the system expanded, I would rather see Metro fix what have first bringing expanded operating hours, increased frequencies, and fixing the horrible bus service with adequate shelters.

That all falls in line with new capital projects ensuring they are built the right way so more money isn't needed later that could otherwise be spent expanded the system at that point. If its done right and gets people to point a to point b as quickly as possible and safely(increasing security), then it will be easier to get said projects done as public opinion will be more favorable than it is now getting more cars off the road reducing congestion and thus increasing the view of those who don't want to use it at all(suburbanites mostly) and getting their vote.

He is not accurate about what Valley residents want. The Robbins Bill prohibited surface rail and only allowed a subway on the Orange Line corridor. It’s the opposite of what he says. The legal block prevented surface rail and only allowed an expensive subway.

https://urbanize.la/post/city-counci...-line-possible

The California Legislature passed a law in 1991 introduced by Alan Robbins which prohibited the use of the corridor for any form of rail transit other than a "deep bore subway located at least 25 feet below ground."

[hughfb3]

We met with County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl’s transportation office today. The meeting was amazing. It’s interesting how many people don’t know about linear induction motors and the value they can bring in getting going over the hill rather than under (Sepulveda Pass). They were super open as was Metro when we met with them 3 weeks ago. We are going to transform our city starting with the Sepulveda Pass savings of $4-6 Billion opening up possibly to find new lines not ok drawing board. Join us tomorrow at 7p if you want to be with us as we make this move. Invitation in above post