Tag Archives: light rail

Metro staff make contract recommendation for firm to build Crenshaw/LAX Line light rail project

Posted by
Click above to see larger. Note: the Metro Board decided in May to build the Leimert Park and Hindry stations.

Click above to see larger. Note: the Metro Board decided in May to build the Leimert Park and Hindry stations.

Metro today provided the agency’s staff recommendation for a contractor to build the 8.5-mile Crenshaw/LAX Line. Staff is recommending a contract in the amount of $1,272,632,356 to Walsh/Shea Corridor Constructors. The contract includes stations at Leimert Park and Hindry that were approved last month by the Metro Board of Directors.

Walsh/Shea is a joint venture between Walsh Construction and J.F. Shea Company. Walsh/Shea has collaborated to work on many other rail projects in the United States, including the DART system in Dallas.

Walsh/Shea was one of four firms to submit proposals for the contract. The Metro staff evaluation gave Walsh/Shea the highest technical score; Walsh/Shea also had the lowest bid in terms of cost.

The Metro Board of Directors will decide on the contract award; the Board can choose to accept or reject the staff recommendation. The Board’s Construction Committee will discuss the contract at its meeting on June 20 and the full Board is scheduled to vote on the contract at their monthly meeting on Thursday, June 27, at Metro’s headquarters adjacent to Union Station. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. Both the committee meeting and full Board meetings are, as usual, open to the public.

The Crenshaw/LAX Line is one of 12 transit projects being funded by Measure R, the half-cent sales tax increase approved by Los Angeles County voters in 2008.

The light rail project between the Expo Line and the Green Line is currently forecast to open in 2019 with major construction beginning in 2014. Utility work is already underway. The Board is also being asked to add funds to the project’s budget to include the Leimert Park and Hindry stations, as well as extra contingency funds, bringing the project’s budget to $2.058 billion, assuming all the funding sources come through. The budget also includes funds for new rail cars, a rail maintenance yard, real estate acquisition and the costs of planning the line and other items not included in the contract total.

Some notes and background about the project and the contract:

•The line is forecast by Metro to have average weekday boardings of just under 25,000 by the year 2035. Metro and Los Angeles World Airports are working together on another Measure R project that would connect the Crenshaw/LAX Line to LAX via either light rail, bus rapid transit and/or people mover. That project is currently scheduled to be completed in the late 2020s and will depend on funding from the city of Los Angeles.

•For those who want the Park Mesa Heights segment placed underground instead of running at street level, I want you to understand the process. First and foremost, it needs to be understood that the Board of Directors and the Federal Transit Administration have approved the project with a street-running segment through Park Mesa Heights. The Board has stuck with this decision.

Continue reading →

Metro Board votes to fully fund Leimert Park Village and Hindry stations for Crenshaw/LAX Line

Posted by

Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas explains his motion to the Metro Board on Wednesday. Photo: Los Angeles County.

 

Stations at Leimert Park Village and at Hindry and Florence avenues near Westchester for the Crenshaw/LAX Line light rail project were funded today by the Metro Board of Directors, ending a two-year long controversy over whether the stops would be built.

The vote was 10 to 1. The motion by Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas included five other co-signers — including Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Supervisor/Metro Board Chair Mike Antonovich — meaning supporters only needed to drum up one more vote to secure approval from a majority of the Metro Board.

Voting for were Ridley-Thomas, Villaraigosa, Antonovich, John Fasana, Jose Huizar, Ara Najarian, Pam O'Connor, Don Knabe, Richard Katz and Mel Wilson. The vote against was from Diane DuBois, who expressed concerns about taking reserve fund money from Metro that may be needed later for other purposes.

To read the entire motion, please see this post from earlier today.

The Los Angeles City Council voted on Wednesday to use $55 million in Measure R local return money to help build the two stations — $40 million for Leimert Park Village and $15 million for Hindry.

The motion directs Metro to add another $80 million to that from Metro's general fund for the coming year's fiscal budget. The motion says that it will cost up to $120 million to build the undergroud Leimert Park Village station and $15 million for the street-level Hindry station.

Continue reading →

Don’t miss the opportunity to comment on the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor project

Posted by

This Monday, May 6th, is the end of the scoping period for the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor.  Scoping is the first stage of environmental review which means this is your opportunity to help shape the study that is evaluating light rail and bus rapid transit options for the Van Nuys corridor in the San Fernando Valley.

Metro held community meetings in March to provide an overview of the study. You can find the links to that presentation, as well as the video of one of the meetings here: http://www.metro.net/projects/east-sfv/east_sfv-meeting-presentations/.

And there are lots of ways for you to share your thoughts on this project with Metro:

E-mail: eastSFVtransit@metro.net

Phone: (818) 276-3233

Twitter: Use #EastSFVScoping

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/EastSFVTransit/app_197602066931325

US Mail: Walt Davis, Project Manager, One Gateway Plaza – MS 99-22-3, Los Angeles, CA  90012

Groundbreaking held for Gold Line bridge over Santa Anita Avenue in Arcadia

Posted by

image005

 

image001

Arcadia and Foothill Extension Construction Authority officials at this morning’s event. At center in the white jacket is Construction Authority Board Chair Doug Tessitor and at right in dark jacket Board First Vice Chair Sam Pedroza.

Here’s the news from an email from Habib Balian, the CEO of the Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority, the agency building the 11.5-mile extension of the Gold Line from Pasadena to the Azusa/Glendora border:

This morning, the City of Arcadia hosted a ground breaking ceremony for the Santa Anita Bridge, a new grade-separated crossing being built by the Construction Authority as part of the Pasadena to Azusa extension. The $12.5 million bridge is being paid for by the city and its residents.

In 2006, after it was determined that the street traffic on Santa Anita did not meet the official requirements to mandate a separated crossing, the city took the issue to its voters. Nearly 72% agreed that they were willing to pay for the grade separation over Santa Anita Avenue rather than have a street-level crossing. [Above] is a city-provided rendering of the future bridge, as well as photos of Construction Authority Board Chairman and Vice Chairman Doug Tessitor and Sam Pedroza, along with city officials, at today’s event.

As I remarked during today’s ceremony, work on Santa Anita Avenue is scheduled to begin at the beginning of May, following the re-opening of Colorado Boulevard. It will take approximately seven months to complete the extensive work necessary to lower the street in the area of the railroad crossing, as well as construct the new bridge. Long-term lane closures are planned, and we appreciate everyone’s patience during this construction activity. The businesses will be open in the area, and we encourage patronage of these businesses during this very impactful period.

At today’s event, Mayor Harbicht and Councilman Kovacic both remarked about the Construction Authority’s good work. It is especially meaningful to hear positive feedback on our work and efficiency during an active construction period. We thank the city officials and staff for their continued dedication and support of the project. It is our continued partnership that helps to move this important project forward.

The Journey Continues,

Habib F. Balian

Here’s the slide presentation on the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor project; one more community meeting this month

Posted by

East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor scoping meeting PowerPoint by sourcemetro

There is one more community meeting this month for the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor project:

Wednesday, March 27, 2013, 4-6 pm
Marvin Braude Constituent Service Center
6262 Van Nuys Boulevard
Van Nuys, CA 91401

Validated Parking available at City Hall Parking Lot (Sylvan/Sylmar Av Entrance)
Served by Metro Orange Line, Metro Rapid Line 761, Metro Local Lines 154, 156, 164, 233 and 237 and DASH Routes Panorama City/Van Nuys and Van Nuys/Studio City

Above is a PowerPoint presentation describing the project, which just finished its Alternatives Analysis study and is headed into its draft environmental study phase. Maps of the options under study — including bus rapid transit and light rail — are in the PowerPoint.

Here’s the Source post from January on the Alternatives Analysis.

Tying the Big Blue Bus to the future Expo Line to Santa Monica

Posted by

Big Blue Bus & the Expo Line

I plucked the above power point from the Westside/Central Service Council agenda — it explains the process that Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus [BBB] will use to eventually integrate service with the Expo Line when the project is completed all the way to Santa Monica.

It’s an interesting challenge for the BBB because a lot of its service is already east-west oriented and the Expo Line, of course, will also run mostly east-west. The challenge, I’m guessing, will be connecting some major destinations via bus to the rail line — i.e. Century City, UCLA, Santa Monica College, Main Street in Santa Monica and the whole Venice scene.

Any specific recommendations, Source readers?

Transportation headlines, Thursday, March 14; ridership gains and reasons to be optimistic about region’s transportation future

Posted by

Here is a look at some of the transportation headlines gathered by us and the Metro Library. The full list of headlines is posted on the Library’s Headlines blog, which you can also access via email subscription or RSS feed.

Ten reasons to salute Los Angeles’ transportation future (L.A. Times)

This slideshow on the Times’ Opinion blog touts the ExpressLanes, new transit projects, mobile apps and the new 6th Street Viaduct as reasons to be optimistic. Of course, some of the projects — such as the Westside Subway — are still a few years down the road.

Transit ridership falls since 2008 (Cato Institute) 

The folks at Cato take issue with the American Public Transportation Association’s news release headlined “Record 10.5 Billion Trips Taken On U.S. Public Transportation In 2012.” And the folks at Cato have a point, albeit a very small one: as the news release goes on to say, the record was actually set in 2008; 2010 was a good year and might have been better if Hurricane Sandy hadn’t temporarily shelved service in parts of the Northeast. The bottom line is 10.5 billion rides were taken on transit in the U.S. last year and I suspect we’re better off than if all those people who rode buses or trains were in their own cars.

Which transit agencies gained riders and lost riders last year? (Governing)

Using APTA’s ridership stats, Governing points out that Metro saw an 18 percent increase in the number of light rail passengers in 2012, a fact largely attributable to the opening of the Expo Line. Light rail also performed well in Dallas and Salt Lake City, two regions that have recently expanded their systems.

 

Upcoming public meetings to discuss East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor project to improve north-south travel

Posted by
BRT Alignment

Bus Rapid Transit Alternative

 

LRT Alignment

Light Rail Transit Alternative

 

Working with the cities of Los Angeles and San Fernando, Metro is studying north-sound transit improvements in the San Fernando Valley, mostly along Van Nuys Boulevard. Among the options being studied are bus rapid transit and light rail (all four of the alternatives are below). Here’s a recent post on the Alternatives Analysis study for the project; maps of the bus rapid transit and light rail options under study are above.

The draft environmental study for the project — officially known as the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor – is just beginning. There are four meetings to give the public a chance to learn more about the project and provide feedback. 

The public can leave official comments on the project via email, the project’s Twitter feed (use the hashtag #ESFVscoping) or on this form on the project’s Facebook page. Metro is trying to make it easier for people to officially comment on projects and it’s good to see social media now part of that effort.

This scoping period is the time when the public tells Metro what’s most important for them about this project and which questions they most want the study to answer. Comments will be accepted until May 6.

The format and information provided at each public meeting will be identical. In the first half hour of the meeting, the public is invited to roam around and visit information stations around the room.

Meeting Dates, Locations, and Information

Saturday, March 16, 2013, 10 am-12 pm

Panorama High School
8015 Van Nuys Boulevard
Panorama City, CA 91402
Served by Metro Rapid Line 761 & Metro Local Line 233; DASH Route – Panorama City/Van Nuys

Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 6-8 pm
The City of San Fernando Regional Pool Facility
208 Park Avenue
San Fernando, CA 91340
Served by Metro Rapid Lines 794 and Metro Local Lines 224 and 234

Thursday, March 21, 2013, 6-8 pm
Arleta High School
14200 Van Nuys Boulevard
Served by Metro Rapid Line 761 and Metro Local Lines 158 and 233

Wednesday, March 27, 2013, 4-6 pm
Marvin Braude Constituent Service Center
6262 Van Nuys Boulevard
Van Nuys, CA 91401

Validated Parking available at City Hall Parking Lot (Sylvan/Sylmar Av Entrance)
Served by Metro Orange Line, Metro Rapid Line 761, Metro Local Lines 154, 156, 164, 233 and 237 and DASH Routes Panorama City/Van Nuys and Van Nuys/Studio City

Can’t make it in-person? Then, view and comment via a live-stream of the presentation beginning at 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, March 21, 2013, or on-demand at:  http://ustream.tv/channel/eastSFV.

Overview

The Study is evaluating the following alternatives:

  • No Build: Establishes a baseline for comparison with the other alternatives being evaluated.  It represents conditions predicted for the year 2035 if no new project is constructed. It does incorporate other new projects that are already included in adopted plans
  • Transportation System Management (TSM): Evaluates the benefits of   lower cost operational improvements including enhanced bus frequencies for Van Nuys Rapid Bus 761 or other bus lines, traffic signal synchronization, off-board fare collection, bus stop amenities/improvements, bus schedule restructuring, intersection and road improvements, etc.
  • Bus Rapid Transit (BRT): Similar to the Metro Orange Line, BRT would generally operate in dedicated lanes with some portions operating in mixed-flow traffic.  BRT typically provides higher frequency, speed and reliability when compared to standard Rapid or Local Bus service. The BRT route being evaluated for this project would travel from the Sylmar/San Fernando Metrolink Station southeast along San Fernando Road and then south on Van Nuys Boulevard with three possible options for the project’s southern terminus.
  • Light Rail Transit (LRT): Similar to the Metro Gold, Blue, Green, and Expo Lines, LRT operates with standard gauge passenger railcars, on exclusive right-of-way with overhead electric power. A two-car train set can carry approximately 300 passengers. Stations are typically spaced about one mile apart. Under this Alternative, Metro would also need to build a new LRT maintenance facility. The LRT Alternative route would travel from the Sylmar/San Fernando Metrolink Station southeast along San Fernando Road and then south on Van Nuys Boulevard to Ventura Boulevard.

Transportation headlines, Tuesday, Feb. 26: art of transit, does light rail stop people from driving?, raising the gas tax?

Posted by

Here is a look at some of the transportation headlines gathered by us and the Metro Library. The full list of headlines is posted on the Library’s Headlines blog, which you can also access via email subscription or RSS feed.

ART OF TRANSIT: A bus on Broadway in downtown Los Angeles. Photo by Steve Hymon/Metro.

ART OF TRANSIT: A bus on Broadway in downtown Los Angeles. There’s a color version after the jump — I like the photo but can’t decide which version I like better. You decide! Photo by Steve Hymon/Metro.

Does light rail really stop people from driving (The Atlantic Cities) 

A new study in the UK showed little evidence that four different light rail lines (all in Britain) made much of any difference on car ownership rates or the amount of driving. Rail ridership in the light rail corridors did go up, but that mostly seemed to come at the expense of bus ridership. Excerpt:

With that in mind, the work still underscores some important lessons. For starters, it offers a sound piece of advice: cities considering a light rail system should strongly consider whether improving the local bus system would be cheaper and just as effective. It also provides yet another reminder of the irrational love people have for their cars; getting city residents to give up driving often requires more than just offering them a ride.

LA Observed: Traffic, bikes and the 405 (KCRW)

LA Observed Kevin Roderick’s weekly radio segment focuses on the lack of talk about traffic during the mayoral campaign. Voters seem interested, Roderick says, but it’s hard for any prospective mayor to credibly say they can fix traffic — thus the talk instead of providing alternatives to it, i.e. bikes and transit. Good segment.

The case for a higher gas tax (New York Times) 

Valerie J. Karplus, a research scientist in the Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change at M.I.T., uses this op-ed piece to make the case that the only thing that will get Americans to drive less is more expensive gasoline. And by expensive she means a lot more than the current national average of $3.72. Excerpts:

But if our goal is to get Americans to drive less and use more fuel-efficient vehicles, and to reduce air pollution and the emission of greenhouse gases, gas prices need to be even higher. The current federal gasoline tax, 18.4 cents a gallon, has been essentially stable since 1993; in inflation-adjusted terms, it’s fallen by 40 percent since then.

Politicians of both parties understandably fear that raising the gas tax would enrage voters. It certainly wouldn’t make lives easier for struggling families. But the gasoline tax is a tool of energy and transportation policy, not social policy, like the minimum wage.

She argues that President Obama took the easier path by greatly raising the fuel efficiency requirements of new vehicles — something that won’t reduce driving much or raise much money for infrastructure improvements. I do think the new standards, however, have a good chance of greatly reducing air pollution in our region. But if driving greatly increases, then those gains could be for naught.

Continue reading →

SR-710 North Study: what’s on the table and what’s off the table

Posted by

I’d like to take a few minutes for an update on the SR-710 North Study, Metro’s effort to improve transportation in the area around the 710 freeway in the San Gabriel Valley. The video above is new from the project team and describes the project.

Original state plans called for completing the 710 from Long Beach to Pasadena. That never happened. As a result, the 710 runs between Long Beach and Alhambra and there’s a very short segment of what was intended to the 710 that extends south of the 210 freeway in Pasadena.

As I’m very sure you’re aware, this is a very contentious issue . While I completely understand and appreciate there are a variety of opinions on what, if anything, needs to be done to improve traffic in the western San Gabriel Valley and beyond, I also believe and hope there are certain facts about Metro’s ongoing study that can be agreed upon:

•A project alternative to widen Avenue 64 was dropped from the study last August, largely because it wouldn’t have improved traffic much according to Metro’s analysis and because of the environmental impacts it would cause to surrounding communities. Reinstating it to the ongoing study would be legally difficult at this stage and, besides, I’m unaware of anyone on Planet Earth who wants it reinstated.

Why was it studied in the first place? Because Metro wanted to review every possible option in order to determine the very best ones for further study. Let’s be honest here. On the one hand, studying a wide spectrum of alternatives gives credibility to Metro’s studies — it’s a way of ensuring the best alternatives are truly the best. On the other hand, it’s also fair to say that Metro’s credibility among some community members took a hit for proposing an alternative that was so unpopular.

Continue reading →