|
Post by darrell on Nov 14, 2010 14:21:49 GMT -8
Are those sprinkler heads in the dirt area between the curb and the ROW fence? How wide is the dirt area... I know it could be deceiving from this angle and dirt height, but it only looks like it is 6-18 inches wide? Yes, those are sprinkler heads. The planter width varies quite a bit, even in a short distance, as in this 9/26/10 photo near 4th Avenue (west of Arlington).
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 14, 2010 21:37:06 GMT -8
I just drove by the whole Expo Line Phase I construction and the rail line is coming along nicely. The station boxes look ready, fencing nearly along the whole ROW, tracks, etc.. It looks like a rail line! However, I want to note some observations that I fear will slow down this train and give a perception of slow speed. 1 - the Rodeo/Exposition X crossing. This is bad. I know the Gold Line has a similar junction at the Mission station, which is right next to the station. There's crossing arms/barriers to keep people safe and have the train accelerate/decelerate into the station. I've also seen a similar crosswalk between Norwalk and Buena Park on Metrolink, which have crossing arms to keep the train speeding through and prevent confusion of drivers. I never have liked the Rodeo/Exposition crossing and I still don't like it. It's confusing. Are there any crossing arms going to be installed at this junction? It only seems fair as Norwalk and South Pasadena do. I don't think our Metro rail crosses a junction like this with no barriers. I hope the trains don't slow down here. 2 - I'm dreading the possible slowness of the Expo Line between Washington and Trousdale station. There's tons of street crossings, which are not lite; like Adams, 23rd, Washington, and the I-110 freeway entrance; which cars cross over right now (it's a bigger entrance than the current I-10 entrance near Pico on the Blue Line..and cars travel on the train tracks for like 5 seconds). I hope Expo has street running priority. Any crossing arms planned? 3 - Trousdale pedestrian crosswalk. I've never seen a crosswalk with train interaction like Trousdale. That's a huge crosswalk. What will happen when a train is coming from the west and going into Trousdale station, but there's still pedestrians waiting to walk in the middle of the intersection? This is a heavy pedestrian crossing...probably the biggest for a Metro rail crossing. I fear trains will be slowing down..and again, a perception of slow, cheap, 2nd class rail in Los Angeles. I wish the trench was at least 50 feet westward so it was under a significant crosswalk. Any thoughts on those 3? Darrel...are you going to prove me wrong with pictures?
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Nov 15, 2010 15:05:53 GMT -8
3 - Trousdale pedestrian crosswalk. I've never seen a crosswalk with train interaction like Trousdale. That's a huge crosswalk. What will happen when a train is coming from the west and going into Trousdale station, but there's still pedestrians waiting to walk in the middle of the intersection? This is a heavy pedestrian crossing...probably the biggest for a Metro rail crossing. I fear trains will be slowing down..and again, a perception of slow, cheap, 2nd class rail in Los Angeles. I wish the trench was at least 50 feet westward so it was under a significant crosswalk. ) I dont see anything strange that that at all, what is uncommon about it?
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 15, 2010 15:14:05 GMT -8
3 - Trousdale pedestrian crosswalk. I've never seen a crosswalk with train interaction like Trousdale. That's a huge crosswalk. What will happen when a train is coming from the west and going into Trousdale station, but there's still pedestrians waiting to walk in the middle of the intersection? This is a heavy pedestrian crossing...probably the biggest for a Metro rail crossing. I fear trains will be slowing down..and again, a perception of slow, cheap, 2nd class rail in Los Angeles. I wish the trench was at least 50 feet westward so it was under a significant crosswalk. ) I dont see anything strange that that at all, what is uncommon about it? Are we building a European tram that goes 15/20 mph next to pedestrians or high speed transit to get people from downtown LA to Culver City as fast as possible? I was hoping the latter....
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 15, 2010 15:26:38 GMT -8
I just drove by the whole Expo Line Phase I construction and the rail line is coming along nicely. The station boxes look ready, fencing nearly along the whole ROW, tracks, etc.. It looks like a rail line! However, I want to note some observations that I fear will slow down this train and give a perception of slow speed. 1 - the Rodeo/Exposition X crossing. This is bad. I know the Gold Line has a similar junction at the Mission station, which is right next to the station. There's crossing arms/barriers to keep people safe and have the train accelerate/decelerate into the station. I've also seen a similar crosswalk between Norwalk and Buena Park on Metrolink, which have crossing arms to keep the train speeding through and prevent confusion of drivers. I never have liked the Rodeo/Exposition crossing and I still don't like it. It's confusing. Are there any crossing arms going to be installed at this junction? It only seems fair as Norwalk and South Pasadena do. I don't think our Metro rail crosses a junction like this with no barriers. I hope the trains don't slow down here. 2 - I'm dreading the possible slowness of the Expo Line between Washington and Trousdale station. There's tons of street crossings, which are not lite; like Adams, 23rd, Washington, and the I-110 freeway entrance; which cars cross over right now (it's a bigger entrance than the current I-10 entrance near Pico on the Blue Line..and cars travel on the train tracks for like 5 seconds). I hope Expo has street running priority. Any crossing arms planned? 3 - Trousdale pedestrian crosswalk. I've never seen a crosswalk with train interaction like Trousdale. That's a huge crosswalk. What will happen when a train is coming from the west and going into Trousdale station, but there's still pedestrians waiting to walk in the middle of the intersection? This is a heavy pedestrian crossing...probably the biggest for a Metro rail crossing. I fear trains will be slowing down..and again, a perception of slow, cheap, 2nd class rail in Los Angeles. I wish the trench was at least 50 feet westward so it was under a significant crosswalk. Any thoughts on those 3? Darrel...are you going to prove me wrong with pictures? There won't be crossing gates at Exposition/Rodeo (Gramercy). It will be signal-controlled. There won't be crossing gates on Flower and Exposition east of Gramercy. Hopefully there will be signal priority for these segments like for the Blue Line. There is very little pedestrian traffic on Trousdale if any. The only exceptions are 6 Saturdays in the Fall, when there is a USC football game. The current station is very easy to access. That's because its entrance is fully at-grade with the station platform sloping down 1% toward the trench. Therefore, there are no steps or access ramps, unlike in any other rail line. There was also no place to fit an underground station because of nearby building foundations; so, it's a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 15, 2010 15:40:26 GMT -8
3 - Trousdale pedestrian crosswalk. I've never seen a crosswalk with train interaction like Trousdale. That's a huge crosswalk. What will happen when a train is coming from the west and going into Trousdale station, but there's still pedestrians waiting to walk in the middle of the intersection? This is a heavy pedestrian crossing...probably the biggest for a Metro rail crossing. I fear trains will be slowing down..and again, a perception of slow, cheap, 2nd class rail in Los Angeles. I wish the trench was at least 50 feet westward so it was under a significant crosswalk. ) In San Francisco, the F-Market has a stop across from the Ferry Building that is comparable to the Expo Park/USC stop. Like Exposition Blvd, the Embarcardero consists of two one-way roads on either side of the ROW. Like Expo, this station has two side platforms and is adjacent to a major pedestrian crossing. The width of the pedestrian crossing allows more people to wait between the train tracks and the street before crossing. The following picture, from Google Maps, shows the San Francisco stop. You can see the tracks, the platforms, the trains, the street, and the pedestrians. One difference between the Muni stop and the Expo stop is that the SF station has split platforms, whereas with Expo the platforms are opposite one another. Another difference: in the San Francisco example, there is a plaza on one side. The next picture is Google street view, facing the pedestrian crossing and one of the platforms. It shows the space between the tracks and the street, which is where pedestrians are to stand. The train doesn't go terribly fast next to the Embarcadero stop. And, clearly in San Francisco, they have done a good job with the barriers and raised curb, which help the pedestrian recognize the distinction between the train area and the standing area.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 15, 2010 16:21:37 GMT -8
Like Expo, this station has two side platforms and is adjacent to a major pedestrian crossing. Again, Trousdale is not a major pedestrian crossing. Usually there are only a very few people, if any, waiting to cross the street. The game days are an exception but there are only six of them in a year, all on Saturdays. There will also be crowd-control plans implemented by Metro on these days.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 15, 2010 17:25:16 GMT -8
Like Expo, this station has two side platforms and is adjacent to a major pedestrian crossing. Again, Trousdale is not a major pedestrian crossing. Usually there are only a very few people, if any, waiting to cross the street. The game days are a exception but there are only six of them in a year, all on Saturdays. There will also be crowd-control plans implemented by Metro on these days. The intent of my post was to provide to LAOfAnaheim an example of a similarly-designed crossing, since he said he had never before seen anything like it. But since you bring it up, are you saying Trojan games will remain the only times the pedestrian crossing at Trousdale will be busy? If so, I have to disagree. Once the line opens, I suspect that lots of people will be crossing at Trousdale, to get to/from the station.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 15, 2010 17:52:53 GMT -8
Like Expo, this station has two side platforms and is adjacent to a major pedestrian crossing. Again, Trousdale is not a major pedestrian crossing. Usually there are only a very few people, if any, waiting to cross the street. The game days are an exception but there are only six of them in a year, all on Saturdays. There will also be crowd-control plans implemented by Metro on these days. It's not just USC game days, but there are tons of raves (Monster Massive, New Years, for example), and then you have the charity walk/run-a-thons at least once a month. There was one earlier in the year I participated in, which we ran over the tracks at Vermont. I hope this route is adjusted next year. It would be pitifiul that the train gets closed down as a way for people to access a large event just to justify the event to have more parking provided.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 15, 2010 20:14:08 GMT -8
But since you bring it up, are you saying Trojan games will remain the only times the pedestrian crossing at Trousdale will be busy? If so, I have to disagree. Once the line opens, I suspect that lots of people will be crossing at Trousdale, to get to/from the station. But this is true for any at-grade station, isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Nov 15, 2010 20:48:05 GMT -8
Isn't tomorrow the day the Expo Board takes a ride down the tracks in a Metrolink vehicle? Anyone know what time it's happening?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 16, 2010 0:12:15 GMT -8
Isn't tomorrow the day the Expo Board takes a ride down the tracks in a Metrolink vehicle? Anyone know what time it's happening? Ah, that was actually supposed to be yesterday (Monday). I forgot about it.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Nov 16, 2010 17:58:11 GMT -8
Darrel...are you going to prove me wrong with pictures? I did take this photo this afternoon just for you ... It could be gated reasonable easily, between the street islands. Interestingly both entrances to the crossing are on the north side; the other is the facing car on the right. Another update is the removal of the top concrete layer of Exposition Blvd. east of La Brea, in preparation for repaving. Finally, here's an arty shot of the late sun on the overhead at Washington and Flower, including what I take to be insulated joints on two contact wires. Isn't tomorrow the day the Expo Board takes a ride down the tracks in a Metrolink vehicle? Anyone know what time it's happening? There was so much stuff on the tracks today - work vehicles, workers vehicles, fences, barriers, etc. - that it's hard to imagine any end-to-end trips along it.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 16, 2010 18:37:05 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 16, 2010 20:10:51 GMT -8
Cool! Common sense has prevailed.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 16, 2010 20:27:12 GMT -8
Cool! Common sense has prevailed. This will be "temporary" anyways. Temporary meaning about 10 years. Once the Regional Connector opens, I'm sure this will be recrowned the "Gold Line" and Pasadena will have the "Blue Line". Thus, no point to add a color and then remove it pretty soon.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 16, 2010 20:33:40 GMT -8
Cool! Common sense has prevailed. This will be "temporary" anyways. Temporary meaning about 10 years. Once the Regional Connector opens, I'm sure this will be recrowned the "Gold Line" and Pasadena will have the "Blue Line". Thus, no point to add a color and then remove it pretty soon. I doubt that naming scheme because it wouldn't allow the flexibility of running Santa Monica - Pasadena or Long Beach - Eastside trains.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 16, 2010 21:51:38 GMT -8
This will be "temporary" anyways. Temporary meaning about 10 years. Once the Regional Connector opens, I'm sure this will be recrowned the "Gold Line" and Pasadena will have the "Blue Line". Thus, no point to add a color and then remove it pretty soon. I doubt that naming scheme because it wouldn't allow the flexibility of running Santa Monica - Pasadena or Long Beach - Eastside trains. Per the Source (http://thesource.metro.net/2010/10/28/fully-underground-route-for-regional-connector-approved-by-metro-board-of-directors/), the planned operation is Santa Monica - East LA and Asuz - Long Beach.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 16, 2010 21:57:25 GMT -8
I doubt that naming scheme because it wouldn't allow the flexibility of running Santa Monica - Pasadena or Long Beach - Eastside trains. Per the Source (http://thesource.metro.net/2010/10/28/fully-underground-route-for-regional-connector-approved-by-metro-board-of-directors/), the planned operation is Santa Monica - East LA and Asuz - Long Beach. Yes, but that doesn't mean that they would like to eliminate the flexibility of having other possibilities for good.
|
|
|
Post by transitfan on Nov 17, 2010 8:44:44 GMT -8
Per the Source (http://thesource.metro.net/2010/10/28/fully-underground-route-for-regional-connector-approved-by-metro-board-of-directors/), the planned operation is Santa Monica - East LA and Asuz - Long Beach. Yes, but that doesn't mean that they would like to eliminate the flexibility of having other possibilities for good. Well, you can be sure that MTA will run specials from East L. A. to Pasadena for the Tournament of Roses parade. Now whether those would be Gold or Blue line trains, post-Regional Connector, is anyone's guess. (I suspect internally the runs would be added to the Gold Line (line 804), rather than Expo (805? Is the Purple line considered line 805 even though it's basically an offshoot of the Red Line (line 802)))?
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 17, 2010 8:58:50 GMT -8
Well, you can be sure that MTA will run specials from East L. A. to Pasadena for the Tournament of Roses parade. Now whether those would be Gold or Blue line trains, post-Regional Connector, is anyone's guess. Once the connector is built, this will not be possible. The track currently connecting the Pasadena branch to the Eastside branch will be removed, and these branches will be routed into the connector. The DEIR is very clear about Metro's plans for normal revenue service. The Expo and Eastside branches will be combined, creating a super east-west line. And the Pasadena and Blue branches will be combined, creating a super north-south line. Of course it's possible that Metro will decide to mix trains (Expo-Pasadena, for example), but this has not been stated and I wouldn't put my money on it. Metro has not said what colors or names it would use, but it is a good guess that they would use Blue for north-south and Gold for east-west. But then again, they could throw out the use of colors altogether and use something else. All of this is 8+ years away anyway, so for now we can keep on calling it the Expo Line.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 17, 2010 10:44:05 GMT -8
My guess is that eventually they will run four different routes (SM - PD, SM - ES, LB - PD, LB - ES), no matter what the plans are now. Therefore, I think the colors and names will not change. I think what we will see is that the timetables refer to other timetables, such as the Gold Line timetable saying "See the Expo Line timetable" for some of the trains and "See the Blue Line timetable" for others.
With four different lines, Metro will also boast to have more lines (as opposed to having only two lines). Timetables will also be simpler, as few people need to travel all the way from Montclair to Long Beach etc.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Nov 17, 2010 10:50:45 GMT -8
I've heard this before as well and I really hope it isn't true. Why not leave it in place for perhaps a new streetcar line that would serve Alameda (or elsewhere)?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 17, 2010 11:11:51 GMT -8
I've heard this before as well and I really hope it isn't true. Why not leave it in place for perhaps a new streetcar line that would serve Alameda (or elsewhere)? I guess they are worried about graffiti and maintenance issues for a station not in use. It would be sad to see this nice station torn down if they actually decide to do so. Hopefully it stays. If they wanted to keep it, they probably would have to run a limited PD - EE service, say once an hour.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 17, 2010 11:18:24 GMT -8
My guess is that eventually they will run four different routes (SM - PD, SM - ES, LB - PD, LB - ES), no matter what the plans are now. Therefore, I think the colors and names will not change. I think what we will see is that the timetables refer to other timetables, such as the Gold Line timetable saying "See the Expo Line timetable" for some of the trains and "See the Blue Line timetable" for others. With four different lines, Metro will also boast to have more lines (as opposed to having only two lines). Timetables will also be simpler, as few people need to travel all the way from Montclair to Long Beach etc. If we do this, we're sacrificing higher frequency on routes with potentially more ridership like Pasadena - Long Beach and Eastside to Santa Monica. I would rather see higher frequency than having to wait for every other train. People can transfer easily when frequencies are high. It makes way more sense to run east-west and north-south trains than north-west or east-south.
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Nov 17, 2010 11:33:57 GMT -8
^ There's probably not much demand for north-west or east-south, anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 17, 2010 11:44:32 GMT -8
My guess is that eventually they will run four different routes (SM - PD, SM - ES, LB - PD, LB - ES), no matter what the plans are now. Therefore, I think the colors and names will not change. I think what we will see is that the timetables refer to other timetables, such as the Gold Line timetable saying "See the Expo Line timetable" for some of the trains and "See the Blue Line timetable" for others. With four different lines, Metro will also boast to have more lines (as opposed to having only two lines). Timetables will also be simpler, as few people need to travel all the way from Montclair to Long Beach etc. If we do this, we're sacrificing higher frequency on routes with potentially more ridership like Pasadena - Long Beach and Eastside to Santa Monica. I would rather see higher frequency than having to wait for every other train. People can transfer easily when frequencies are high. It makes way more sense to run east-west and north-south trains than north-west or east-south. I think the question is if the LB riders would like to go to EE or PD, if the SM riders would like to go to PD or EE, if the PD riders would like to go to SM or LB, and if the EE riders would like to go to SM or LB. (1) I think SM will be more popular than LB among both the PD and EE riders. (2) I think PD will be more popular than EE among both the SM and LB riders. (3) Currently there are more PD riders than EE riders. It will be more so after the Foothill extension. (4) I project SM and LB riders to be approximately the same. Combining (1) through (4), if the ridership should determine which routes to be picked, than the SM - PD and LB - EE would be the logical choices. Metro picked up SM - EE and LB - PD not based on ridership considerations but simple-minded geometry considerations.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 17, 2010 12:10:00 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Nov 17, 2010 12:12:04 GMT -8
Based on antidote evidence and observation, I think this is the optimum setup:
1. Santa Monica to Whittier (Using "gold" as the color on the map) 2. Santa Monica to Azusa (Using "aqua" as the color on the map - and maybe even keeping the Expo name) 3. Azusa to Long Beach (Using "blue" as the color on the map)
Train 1 will maintain the current headway frequency for East side leg of Gold line (and future frequency of Expo line) Train 3 will maintain the current headway frequency for Blue line and the Pasadena leg of current Gold line Train 2 will add frequency to what I think will be the most heavily traveled leg(s) once Expo and DC are running (e.g. from Foothill to SM)
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 17, 2010 12:31:33 GMT -8
Based on antidote evidence and observation, I think this is the optimum setup: Your setup would have two services to Azusa but only one service to Long Beach. For load-balancing, it ought to be the other way around. The Long Beach branch (current Blue Line) serves over 80,000 riders per day. My solution (which I've posted before on the Regional Connector forum) is as follows: - Gold Line: Santa Monica - East L.A., 6 min headways.
- Blue Line: Long Beach - Pasadena, 6 min headways.
- Foothill Line: Pasadena - Azusa/Montclair/Ontario, 10 min headways.
The Blue Line and Foothill Line would overlap in Old Town Pasadena.
|
|