Q of Week: South Valley alignment

[regen]

For the south San Fernando Valley portion of the 405 Rail Line up to Roscoe Blvd., there are several alignment choices: Van Nuys Blvd., Sepulveda Blvd., and I-405 Freeway. An additional "hybrid" option, suggested by Jerard Wright, would be to have the route go on Sepulveda from Ventura to the Orange Line, Orange Line to Van Nuys, then north on Van Nuys.

We'll cover the North Valley later too.

Here are some advantages and disadvantages:

Van Nuys Blvd.
1. Highest residential density of any Valley corridor
2. Highest bus ridership of any Valley corridor
3. Potential to revive walkable retail corridor
4. Connects to Amtrak and Metrolink Ventura County Line
5. Shorter tunnel to Wilshire/Westwood

Sepulveda Blvd.
1. 2nd highest residential density of any Valley corridor
2. Wide alignment available along the full length of the route
3. Additional ridership destination at Ventura w/mall and office buildings
4. Close access to freeway if park-and-ride is a priority

"Hybrid" (Sepulveda-Orange Line-Van Nuys)
1. Highest residential density of any Valley corridor (along Van Nuys)
2. Wide alignment available along the full length of the route
3. Highest bus ridership of any Valley corridor (along Van Nuys)
4. Potential to revive walkable retail corridor (along Van Nuys)
5. Connects to Amtrak and Metrolink Ventura County Line (along Van Nuys)
6. Could serve as a building block for coverting the Orange Line to rail
7. Additional ridership destination at Ventura w/mall and office buildings (along Sepulveda)
8. Close access to freeway if park-and-ride is a priority (along Sepulveda)

Disadvantages of "Hybrid"
1. Longest Valley route = highest cost, longer travel time
2. Longer tunnel than Van Nuys route (same as Sepulveda) = higher cost
3. Most S-curves = slower speeds, further lengthening trip times
4. Higher cost could reduce cost effectiveness rating = smaller federal match
5. Would impact Orange Line bus service: need for a new alignment

Disadvantages of I-405 Freeway
1. Elevated track would be enormously expensive
2. At-grade track would require elevators for station access - expensive
3. Longer tunnel than Van Nuys route (same as Sepulveda) = much higher cost
4. Low density adjacent land use
5. Longer distance for pedestrian access over the freeway
6. High exposure to noise and pollution

What do you think?

[JerardWright]

Mar 14, 2011 22:42:29 GMT -8 regen said:

Here are some advantages and disadvantages:

Van Nuys Blvd.
1. Highest residential density of any Valley corridor
2. Highest bus ridership of any Valley corridor
3. Potential to revive walkable retail corridor
4. Connects to Amtrak and Metrolink Ventura County Line
5. Shorter tunnel to Wilshire/Westwood

Sepulveda Blvd.
1. 2nd highest residential density of any Valley corridor
2. Wide alignment available along the full length of the route
3. Additional ridership destination at Ventura w/mall and office buildings
4. Close access to freeway if park-and-ride is a priority

"Hybrid" (Sepulveda-Orange Line-Van Nuys)
1. Highest residential density of any Valley corridor (along Van Nuys)
2. Wide alignment available along the full length of the route
3. Highest bus ridership of any Valley corridor (along Van Nuys)
4. Potential to revive walkable retail corridor (along Van Nuys)
5. Connects to Amtrak and Metrolink Ventura County Line (along Van Nuys)
6. Could serve as a building block for coverting the Orange Line to rail
7. Additional ridership destination at Ventura w/mall and office buildings (along Sepulveda)
8. Close access to freeway if park-and-ride is a priority (along Sepulveda)

Another advantage is that the alignment has the strongest potential to locate a train storage/M&O facility assuming the Red/Purple line yard can't expand beyond and it will be operationally difficult to shlep and deadhead a train about 12-13 additional miles everyday for regular revenue service. Nor we can utilize the Expo Line storage facility as that one will probably be maxed out from day one.

Disadvantages of "Hybrid"
1. Longest Valley route = highest cost, longer travel time
2. Longer tunnel than Van Nuys route (same as Sepulveda) = higher cost
3. Most S-curves = slower speeds, further lengthening trip times
4. Higher cost could reduce cost effectiveness rating = smaller federal match
5. Would impact Orange Line bus service: need for a new alignment

In addition, though it will be longer and the curves will be near station locations so that impact is fairly minimal, this has the potential to be the higher ridership line that will offset the slightly longer alignment. It's like saying the Red Line should have went in a straight line from Hollywood/Highland to Barham Blvd Hollywood Way- and missed the ridership generator in Universal City in the process- because it's in a short straight line.

However depending on how close the tunnel is to the 405 freeway at critical points that slightly extra distance may require less engineering for things neccessary for a tunnel like ventilation shafts, power substations and crossovers so that if a train is stuck in the tunnel(s) it doesnt severely shut down rail operations like it sometimes does with the Red Line when an incident occurs in the Cauhenga Pass tunnel.

As for Orange Line operations, the ROW is pretty wide all that it would require is removing the landscaping and temporary shut down of the bike path, the Orange Line can operate as during construction.

[regen]

Mar 14, 2011 23:47:03 GMT -8 JerardWright said:

As for Orange Line operations, the ROW is pretty wide all that it would require is removing the landscaping and temporary shut down of the bike path, the Orange Line can operate as during construction.

The Orange Line ROW immediately east of Sepulveda is one of the constrained bottlenecks: in fact, it was too narrow to even create a full Class I bike path, so Metro built a mixed-used path from Sepulveda to about 1/4 mile east, where the ROW and the path widen sufficiently to have separate markings for bikes and pedestrians. Most likely, the buses would have to be shifted to either Victory or Oxnard if the 405 rail line goes along the Orange Line ROW there; not necessarily a deal breaker, but it would require some reworking.

[bzcat]

I used to think the hybrid option was a good idea as it allows a relative easy path to connect the line from Van Nuys to Sepulveda/Ventura.

But after reading many debates here and looking at the map myself, I realized the shortest tunnel option (Van Nuys to Westwood) is the most feasible. Yes, that means missing the Sepulveda/Ventura cluster of office and mall... but as it had been pointed out before, there is a frequent bus line that runs between the 1/2 mile between Van Nuys/Ventura and Sepulveda/Ventura.

I vote for a straight Van Nuys alignment.

[jdrcrasher]

I still think a Van Nuys-Parthenia-Sepulveda hybrid is the best.

[JerardWright]

Mar 15, 2011 7:48:27 GMT -8 regen said:

Mar 14, 2011 23:47:03 GMT -8 JerardWright said:

As for Orange Line operations, the ROW is pretty wide all that it would require is removing the landscaping and temporary shut down of the bike path, the Orange Line can operate as during construction.

The Orange Line ROW immediately east of Sepulveda is one of the constrained bottlenecks: in fact, it was too narrow to even create a full Class I bike path, so Metro built a mixed-used path from Sepulveda to about 1/4 mile east,

To replace parking at Staples and industrial lot, that easement can be purchased, Orange Line stays where it is during construction. The bike path will be adjusted/re-routed as I indicated earlier.

I wonder where you will place the vent shafts for this straight line Van Nuys tunnel? Without proper ventilation, you have no rail tunnel project.

Mar 15, 2011 10:01:47 GMT -8 bzcat said:

... Yes, that means missing the Sepulveda/Ventura cluster of office and mall... but as it had been pointed out before, there is a frequent bus line that runs between the 1/2 mile between Van Nuys/Ventura and Sepulveda/Ventura.

It's a mile between the two points not a half mile.

[regen]

Mar 14, 2011 23:47:03 GMT -8 JerardWright said:

Mar 14, 2011 22:42:29 GMT -8 regen said:

5. Would impact Orange Line bus service: need for a new alignment

As for Orange Line operations, the ROW is pretty wide all that it would require is removing the landscaping and temporary shut down of the bike path, the Orange Line can operate as during construction.

Do you envision the Orange Line segment to be elevated or at-grade? If it's elevated or if the ROW is widened, then there would be sufficient room for both bus and rail, though that would increase the cost.

[JerardWright]

Mar 15, 2011 19:13:17 GMT -8 regen said:

Mar 14, 2011 23:47:03 GMT -8 JerardWright said:

As for Orange Line operations, the ROW is pretty wide all that it would require is removing the landscaping and temporary shut down of the bike path, the Orange Line can operate as during construction.

Do you envision the Orange Line segment to be elevated or at-grade? If it's elevated or if the ROW is widened, then there would be sufficient room for both bus and rail, though that would increase the cost.

As I envision this to be mostly at-grade LRT with a few grade separations at key intersections with the temporary removal of the landscaping and bike path in some sections and then converted in phases where the busway is incrementally upgraded to LRT probably starting first from Sepulveda EAST toward North Hollywood and Burbank, then WEST when the demand calls for it, even take a page out of Pittsburgh's book and have the corridor be a joint LRT and Busway line with both high and low-floor platforms integrated together.

Then over time in some stretches the busway is recycled to become a new dedicated bikeway with more landscaping and the current busway platforms would become dedicated bike parking for the upgraded transit line.

[jeisenbe]

Jerard,
So the Orange Line and the new light rail line would share two tracks on this section?

This would be a similar situation to the Regional Connector in Downtown LA. Although it is doable, it makes operations more complicated, and does limit the maximum capacity of both lines.

I would like to keep the Sepulveda Pass line separate, because there is a chance we may need a train every 2 minutes on it at rush hour, someday after oil production has peaked, if it is built as LRT with 3 or 4 car trains.

[JerardWright]

Mar 16, 2011 0:19:03 GMT -8 jeisenbe said:

Jerard,
So the Orange Line and the new light rail line would share two tracks on this section?

This would be a similar situation to the Regional Connector in Downtown LA. Although it is doable, it makes operations more complicated, and does limit the maximum capacity of both lines.
I would like to keep the Sepulveda Pass line separate, because there is a chance we may need a train every 2 minutes on it at rush hour, someday after oil production has peaked, if it is built as LRT with 3 or 4 car trains.

Operationally it shouldn't make things difficult and unlike the Red/Purple Line subway all we would need to do in this stretch when demand calls for it is add two more tracks in this one mile section and we've improved capacity, but that day maybe a long ways away this is one of the advantages of using this right of way and with at-grade/aerial when necessary because it begins the phased incremental approach to building rail along this east-west corridor and north-south in the SFValley.