Hm...I know for sure it's about twice the length of the Cahuenga Pass tunnel, which takes 4 minutes from Hollywood/Highland to Universal City. So...give or take 8 minutes uninterrupted tunnelage.
I guess that's about 50% longer than the transbay tube between Embarcadero and Oakland, but there's additional above ground track between the portal in Oakland and the first station. I don't think it's ridiculous to have a tunnel of that length if it can be built within a semi-reasonable budget. It will still be much faster than driving over the pass on the 405.
However after watching last month's meeting, it sounds like UCLA isn't really open to having a station under campus. Another logical option is Le Conte/Westwood. Although it's pretty close to Wilshire, it is a decent middle ground between campus and Wilshire and has good room for portals at the surface. But apparently constructing a subway station there would require near-catastrophic disruption of Westwood Village.
LOL stupid Bruins, I'm proud of USC and its THREE Metro Rail stations! Fight On!
In the spirit of fairness, USC wasn't exactly warm to Expo in its current configuration.
"There are no buildings that have been built by chance, remote from the human society where they have grown and its needs, hopes and understandings..."
I concur. The students almost certainly will support this, so the same should be with school officials.
The comment about UCLA administrators is regarding an east-west Purple Line alignment through campus. That is different from a north-south alignment for a Valley-Westside transit line. Having talked with UCLA administrators about the Transit Coalition's Metro JEM Line concept, they are definitely not opposed to it.
The comment about UCLA administrators is regarding an east-west Purple Line alignment through campus. That is different from a north-south alignment for a Valley-Westside transit line. Having talked with UCLA administrators about the Transit Coalition's Metro JEM Line concept, they are definitely not opposed to it.
You're right about the context of the discussion being the Purple Line Extension, but the points mentioned apply to proposals for this project too.
From the meeting: "They couldn't find a place that was big enough to put a 600-1000 foot-long subway box on campus that wouldn't cost them a lot of damage. They (UCLA administrators) weren't supportive of putting a station up on the center of campus."
UCLA has been very supportive of the Westside Subway Extension project, but still didn't want a station on campus. If they nixed a good idea on one worthwhile project, it stands to reason that they'll do the same for another worthwhile project
...unless you're talking about a far northern station (like Sunset and Westwood) that wouldn't have been considered as part of the WSE.
In any case, I really hope you're right. Westwood/UCLA would be well served by the addition of a second transit station.
"There are no buildings that have been built by chance, remote from the human society where they have grown and its needs, hopes and understandings..."
Joined: Feb 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 69 Location: Venice
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #181 on Jul 1, 2012, 10:35pm »
I created a new community page for rail alternative of the Sepulveda Pass Transit Corridor, titling it "Sepulveda Pass Subway" as it is simpler and snappier. Please like, give feedback, and post content.
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #182 on Jul 2, 2012, 11:41am »
I can see why UCLA would be opposed to a station on south campus or near the medical center but I'm sure some sort of accommodation can be made in the north campus near the Anderson MBA complex. The athletic practice field which is above the underground parking garage would be an ideal place to put the subway station but the presence of parking garage would preclude an open cut and cover station construction.
I created a new community page for rail alternative of the Sepulveda Pass Transit Corridor, titling it "Sepulveda Pass Subway" as it is simpler and snappier. Please like, give feedback, and post content.
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #184 on Jul 3, 2012, 5:20pm »
Recently, Metro released its draft concepts for the I-405 transit corridor as a "receive and file" presentation to the Metro Board of Directors, Planning and Programming Committee: there's an article on The Source, where you can also download the full study:
I created a new community page for rail alternative of the Sepulveda Pass Transit Corridor, titling it "Sepulveda Pass Subway" as it is simpler and snappier. Please like, give feedback, and post content.
Feel free to "like" the page--the more, the merrier!
Ah, completely forgot about that page, even though I have liked it as well. Got too much going on. Thanks for the reminder. Maybe the new page will have some sort of an alternative role akin to Gokhan's Hello Expo page.
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #187 on Jul 16, 2012, 10:35am »
How big is the demand for a Valley-Westside rail transit connection? Enough that people are taking the Red Line east to take the Expo Line back west, as reported by the Daily News:
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #188 on Jul 17, 2012, 10:16pm »
Thanks for the link to the Daily News article. I heard a radio report on KNX, but couldn't find anything on the KNX website or in the LA Times. There was a Page 2 column in the Friday Times by a writer who's thankful that he doesn't have to use the 405 anymore. It was just about a year ago that Caltrans did a weekend outage that was dubbed "Carmageddon" but turned out to be what one of my musical friends would call a "Big Big Yeah".
Rather than drive, ride! Ride Metro Rail, Metro bus, bicycle, vanpool, carpool, motorcycle!
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 399 Location: Near Metro Rapid 761 "station"
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #189 on Jul 19, 2012, 10:23pm »
I'm sure the demand was always there; one can't just go off of the ridership of Metro Rapid 761 bus to gauge demand as those that ride it don't have other choices (other than muni buses). I'm pretty sure some drivers on the I-405 freeway don't want to drive the Sepulveda Pass, but what other option do they got? A bus that takes a half hour (or more) in the Pass? For those that were already fed up, it looks like some are going from the Valley to the Westside via Downtown as evidenced by the Daily News report; although in general, I believe Expo Line riders come from all parts of SoCal, the Daily News simply is focusing on an unusual trend (and bringing light on the need for a more direct rail connection).
Besides, those rumors about SFV NIMBYism - if it's true, then how can Van Nuys Blvd end up being the top 10 Metro bus corridor? And the Metro Red Line, it didn't break the 100,000 daily boardings until reaching North Hollywood. The Orange Line - it quickly outgrew itself (that's 18 miles and nearly 30,000 boardings we can't factor into our Metro Rail stats). Now's the time to advocate for the North SFV - Westside Metro Rail (note my emphasis on North SFV).
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 861 Location: Los Angeles
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #190 on Jul 20, 2012, 12:59pm »
In regards to planning this line, I think they need to make sure the stations on the tunnel can accomodate 5-6 car length trains, but then the problem is going to be extending to the North or South as it will be doubtful you could get anything longer than 3 car trains.
Also, a big problem with this line is that nearly everyone is going to be coming South to the City in the morning and then back to the Valley in the afternoon. Not very efficient operationally. Maybe they can attach additional cars in the first tunnel station or just run more frequent headways in the tunnel section. Something similar will likely have to be done with the Gold Line past Pasadena
In regards to planning this line, I think they need to make sure the stations on the tunnel can accomodate 5-6 car length trains, but then the problem is going to be extending to the North or South as it will be doubtful you could get anything longer than 3 car trains.
Also, a big problem with this line is that nearly everyone is going to be coming South to the City in the morning and then back to the Valley in the afternoon. Not very efficient operationally. Maybe they can attach additional cars in the first tunnel station or just run more frequent headways in the tunnel section. Something similar will likely have to be done with the Gold Line past Pasadena
By a combination of planning standards and sheer luck, north of the Orange Line there is room on at least one side of every likely Van Nuys Blvd. station (e.g., major arterial intersections) for a six-car platform. Since the Transit Coalition has been advocating for grade separation at the Orange Line, which could place the North SFV Valley-Westside line in a trench or tunnel, that would take care of the SFV ROW. South of Wilshire, the options depend both on the alignment and choices regarding grade separation.
As for operation, perhaps Metro might decide to have a wye with stub tracks underground at the Orange Line to run short lines, which could boost peak frequency and also provide fully automated, low cost 24/7 service late at night when the line might not need to run at grade, using buses to handle lighter passenger loads on the street-running section. During the day, though, reverse commuting will account for some traffic; this line will channel students toward Mission College and employees to Metrolink and Santa Clarita Transit buses for jobs in the Santa Clarita Valley. If HSR builds a station in Sylmar/San Fernando, then this would be faster way for Westsiders to get there, another source of potential riders. In addition to the North Valley segment, the Sepulveda Pass segment would bring Westsiders much closer to the studios; shuttles from the Orange Line could bring employees to work.
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #192 on Aug 22, 2012, 10:15am »
The Sepulveda Pass Project is a planned busway. I believe the continued plans and funding levels for BRT in the SFV is a result of the legal hurdle which prevented the Orange Line from being rail as originally planned, the Robbins Bill. If the Robbins Bill were repealed, it would be a concrete step in voicing our support for rail projects in the SFV.
The Robbins Bill may not be directly related to the Sepvuleda Pass or East SFV Projects, but the Robbins Bill was passed before measure R, before those projects were planned. It's hard to believe that no relationship exist when less dense areas continue to get transportation funding while the most heavily congested corridors in the county (and country) get less then even its population would warrant, let alone need.
[https://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-ca-convert-the-orange-line-busway-to-rail?utm_campaign=petition_creator _email&utm_medium=email&utm_source=share_petition]Petition to Repeal the Robbins Bill[/url]
Please don't get bogged in the details of converting the Orange Line to rail. It will eventually happen, but not in our life times. This is about communicating our collective desire, through a strong message of passing/repealing a law, to have rail transit through the Sepulveda Pass. We can ensure we don't make the same mistakes in the future by fixing the ones of the past.
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #193 on Aug 22, 2012, 7:22pm »
Anthony, 10 years ago, anyone that would've proposed Measure R would've been considered nuts.
Saying we'll never see the Orange Line converted in our lifetimes (i'm almost 23, with some pretty good family gene history) is just simply ludicrous.
Also, the bridges that were designed on the Chatsworth Extension were reportedly designed to carry light-rail cars, so the long-term planning by Metro is already underway.
The Robbins Bill may not be directly related to the Sepvuleda Pass or East SFV Projects, but the Robbins Bill was passed before measure R, before those projects were planned. It's hard to believe that no relationship exist when less dense areas continue to get transportation funding while the most heavily congested corridors in the county (and country) get less then even its population would warrant, let alone need.
"What we're advocating is an entire grid system throughout the Valley like Curitiba has,'' Fleming said. "People can ride that system for 65 cents from one end of town to the other and get there in 20 to 30 minutes, and it's as spread out as the Valley.''
And
No longer is the objective to move people from the Valley to downtown. The goal now is to move transit-dependent people efficiently and cheaply around the Valley. "A train from Warner Center to the Music Center is not the solution to the Valley's transit problems,'' Fleming said. "We've got to get a working mother in Pacoima to a manufacturing plant in Chatsworth, and you're not going to do that with an east-west rail line.''
Let's not let a 20 year old mistake ruin our future; help repeal the Robbins Bill:
Joined: May 2007 Posts: 76 Location: Wilshire/La Brea
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #195 on Aug 22, 2012, 10:29pm »
I admit I could be misinformed, but a North/South railway on Van Nuys Blvd. would not violate any of the provisions of the Robbins bill:
SB 211, introduced by then-State Senator Alan Robbins in 1991, added Section 130265 to the Public Utilities Code, which placed specific restrictions on development of the Burbank-Chandler right-of-way for transit purposes. The three key subdivisions of §130265 are (emphasis in red mine):
In the area between the western curb of Hazeltine Avenue and a line parallel to and 50 feet west of the western edge of the Hollywood Freeway, there may not be constructed any exclusive public mass transit rail guideway, rail rapid transit or light rail system, or other track, other than as a subway system that is covered and below grade. In the area described in subdivision (c), no station may be constructed, other than a station where the main entrance is located on property that is currently part of the Los Angeles Valley College campus or on that portion of the existing railroad right-of-way located north of Burbank Boulevard and east of Fulton Avenue. In the area below Tujunga Wash and at least one mile to the east and west of Tujunga Wash, there may not be constructed any exclusive mass transit rail guideway, rail rapid transit or light rail system, or other track, other than as a subway using boring technology as a deep bore subway located at least 25 feet below ground, measured from the existing ground level to the top of the tunnel.
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #197 on Aug 31, 2012, 9:49pm »
Someone had asked about how deep Moraga canyon is. It is very deep which is actually a good thing with respect to not having a lot of grade issues. You would just have to tunnel from Sherman Oaks through the north side of the Santa Monicas. However, about a mile north of Mulholland the track would probably be able to punch out the canyon wall into the canyon itself (or buried beneath a shallow trench). As far as emergency vehicle access, it is also attractive. Although the canyon is probably too steep to access from the sides, there is good access from the north off of Mulholland behind Stephen S. Wise Temple and there is excellent access from below, as the very bottom of the canyon above Sunset has a dead-end road that goes up it.
As to the other question about who purchased a big chunk of the canyon and what they plan to do with it, I don't know, but the attached link says that the $35 million sale was the largest privately owned parcel in Bel Air, over 260 acres in Moraga Canyon. The link is: http://www.drewandbrooke.com/about.php
Also, curious about the thoughts on running it from Westwood to Century City to Robertson Expo line, after it enters the City.
By the way, I signed on this time as KRS2, because the message board won't accept "KRS" as it still says that my KRS account is still awaiting approval from the moderator.
Rather than drive, ride! Ride Metro Rail, Metro bus, bicycle, vanpool, carpool, motorcycle!
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 399 Location: Near Metro Rapid 761 "station"
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #198 on Sept 20, 2012, 12:50am »
Here's some PowerPoint slides by Metro presented to both the San Fernando Valley and Westside/Central Service Councils. The concepts aren't new as they were mentioned in The Source not long ago; the ordering of the concepts are based on project costs, with the last concept being the most expensive. Note concept 5 ("fixed-guideway rail LRT or HRT transit" that goes from the Sylmar/San Fernando Metrolink station to Century/Aviation Green/Crenshaw Line station, in the SFV via San Fernando Road and Van Nuys Boulevard); this is what we're advocating for, and in fact David Mieger even thanked the Transit Coalition for concept 5.
Re: Measure R Planning - Valley-Westside Rail Tunn « Reply #199 on Sept 23, 2012, 3:27pm »
Very interesting. It would be great to see them plan for the same type of train that the Expo line uses, and in fact connect onto the Expo line. Also, is it safe to assume that the folks who are studying this will be thinking through using a trench in Moraga canyon as a cost saving alternative? Do they have that kind of local knowledge of the topography in the Santa Monica mountains? I like to think that anything I can think of, they too would be thinking of. But I don't know if that is a safe assumption.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Calendar]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/calendar.gif "[Calendar]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Reply]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/reply.gif "[Reply]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
![[locked poll]](http://images.proboards.com/poll_icon_closed.gif "[locked poll]"){kind=icon}
Poll
Author
![[Quote]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/quote.gif "[Quote]")
Logged![[avatar]](http://megancase.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/metro-current-scheme.gif "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://chriscrash.com/images-home/crash_symbol.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://images.fastcompany.com/upload/30-10-Los-Angeles-Plan-Revised.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://www.elsongs.com/images/pics/go_expo.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")