|
Post by numble on Jan 5, 2019 3:22:00 GMT -8
Eco-Rapid Transit, which is one of the main backers of the WSAB project, has been advocating for an extension to Burbank. There is a 1994 EIR completed for a light rail line between Downtown LA and Burbank. Since 2016, Metro has been studying a potential rail line to the Burbank Airport from Downtown LA, via Glendale and Downtown Burbank, with $900k funding secured for a feasibility study: metro.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2860966&GUID=98E55990-1E6D-4638-9468-CA7652172BA2&FullText=1According to this presentation from Metro to Eco-Rapid in 2017, the feasibility study is looking at Light Rail, Metrolink or DMU service, and the study was targeted for completion in Fall 2018 with presentation to the board in Winter 2018: eco-rapid.org/Project/studies_reports/verdugocorridor.pdfAccording to page 63 of this PDF for Metro’s January 2019 TBAC meeting, the LA-Glendale-Burbank Corridor Feasibility Study is 40% complete with a target contract completion date of March 2019. media.metro.net/uploads/Metro_Connect/TBAC%20Agenda%20January%202019.pdfIt’s not on Measure M, but with a pre-existing advocacy base in Eco-Rapid, this could be one of the projects considered after the Measure M projects.
|
|
|
Post by jahanes on Jan 5, 2019 12:03:07 GMT -8
It seems strange that the only route under consideration follows the Metrolink when the logical route follows Glendale and/or Sunset boulevards. Especially is Option G is chosen for the southern approach. It would also be useful for a future branch along sunset and Santa Monica to WeHo, which I hope metro is studying as well...
I guess there’s not much reason for concern this early, but I could see this leading to a botched alignment alternatives analysis.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Jan 7, 2019 12:43:10 GMT -8
I've been saying this for years on here. Since WSAB is some ways an alternative to the 5 going to OC, it makes sense that it would continue that way north.
As for following the Metrolink path, it really only makes sense if Union Station becomes the (temporary) terminus. And even then, Metrolink is problematic because any additional service on the ROW could be disruptive to CAHSR.
If Alt. G is chosen, then an extension via Glendale Blvd. and Brand would make sense, though it would be significantly more expensive for the following:
--The original PE Glendale/Burbank line (where this new extension would likely run) has a few barriers in place. I'm not sure you could do at-grade rail down a freeway-level traffic street like Glendale; it would probably need to be underground until it hit the 2 freeway.
--A new bridge would be needed over the L.A. river.
--You *might* be able to swing at-grade on Brand, but even that could be trouble.
--Going into Burbank, the line would need to completely rip up the Glenoaks median until Providencia, where the line would need to go underground *again* due to Glenoaks Blvd. narrowing.
Either way, you're looking at an awfully costly, time-consuming project. If WSAB is gonna cost $6 billion, you could be looking at billions more for this extension.
One upshot is that the extension to Glendale would probably only require four stations:
--Historic Filipinotown (2nd/Beverly/Lucas) --Echo Park (Sunset/Glendale/Reservoir) --Cerritos Park (Glendale/San Fernando) OR Glendale Metrolink (very tough call, since the Metrolink is a bit too far from the route and San Fernando has far more useful bus connections) --Downtown Glendale (Brand/Broadway)
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jan 8, 2019 12:22:22 GMT -8
We will get much more bang for the buck if we electrified Metrolink and use EMU to run metro like service.
The extension of WSAB should go west in my opinion. Look at Santa Monica blvd or Venice blvd.
|
|
|
Post by numble on Mar 12, 2019 14:42:47 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by joshuanickel on Mar 13, 2019 11:16:57 GMT -8
Looking at the different options, I think that the E/DMU option would work great for this corridor. It can share the existing tracks, has similar capacity to light rail without the higher cost and you can add the infill stations that helps this route serve the local communities between the metrolink stations.
|
|
|
Post by jahanes on Mar 14, 2019 9:47:41 GMT -8
I find the discussion of modes or operating agencies irrelevant since metrolink is simultaneously envisioning 10-minute frequencies on that particular stretch. I'm for building all those local stations too if the line can be built to accommodate express tracks. I can see a short line service to burbank coming in handy in the midday to preserve constant frequent service on that segment.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 15, 2019 9:44:28 GMT -8
I'm glad to see EMU/DMU is finally being taken seriously.
I would favor it here because of the speed/spacing profile of this corridor, but also because using for this corridor will become a more viable option for other corridors.
I wonder how feasible it is to add another track between Burbank to LAUS.
|
|
|
Post by fissure on Mar 15, 2019 22:56:14 GMT -8
I'm glad to see EMU/DMU is finally being taken seriously. I would favor it here because of the speed/spacing profile of this corridor, but also because using for this corridor will become a more viable option for other corridors. I wonder how feasible it is to add another track between Burbank to LAUS. It's definitely wide enough for a third track (and already has it in places) from where it crosses the river to Burbank. A 4th track might be a squeeze at some points. I don't think they can fit 4 tracks plus platforms along most of it, though.
|
|
|
Post by brady12 on Mar 20, 2019 0:47:47 GMT -8
Let’s say they built this as light rail, if it’s gonna go up to Burbank couldn’t you just turn left and connect it to the orange line light rail?! Or you could extend the red line to Burbank airport station and meet up with the new line.
I get the advantages of the E/DMU but if this is gonna be an EXTENSION of the WSAB line shouldn’t it be the same mode?
|
|
|
Post by numble on Mar 20, 2019 1:08:27 GMT -8
Let’s say they built this as light rail, if it’s gonna go up to Burbank couldn’t you just turn left and connect it to the orange line light rail?! Or you could extend the red line to Burbank airport station and meet up with the new line. I get the advantages of the E/DMU but if this is gonna be an EXTENSION of the WSAB line shouldn’t it be the same mode? Yes, some groups and cities are pushing for this to be LRT and act as an extension of the WSAB line. But that does not have any funding right now so a cheaper interim option would be to improve Metrolink service. One of the LRT route options does follow one of the options for a North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT, which Measure M says can be converted to LRT in the future. So, yes such options are on the table. But there could be many multiple variations, as you can imagine.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Jul 6, 2019 11:02:03 GMT -8
Can an admin please get on this and ban this spam bot?
|
|
|
Post by andert on Aug 8, 2019 8:54:05 GMT -8
This is interesting: urbanize.la/post/glendale-considers-two-alignments-proposed-streetcar-systemI didn't even know Glendale was planning a streetcar system. But if this happens, it would preclude an LRT extension up Brand (presumably). I would hope that the people planning this, the NoHo-Pasadena BRT (that will one day be LRT presumably), and the Metrolink upgrades are all working together to plan an ideal complete system, leaving room for a northern LRT extension somewhere... but it feels like they're all happening in a vacuum.
|
|
|
Post by numble on Aug 8, 2019 19:31:41 GMT -8
This is interesting: urbanize.la/post/glendale-considers-two-alignments-proposed-streetcar-systemI didn't even know Glendale was planning a streetcar system. But if this happens, it would preclude an LRT extension up Brand (presumably). I would hope that the people planning this, the NoHo-Pasadena BRT (that will one day be LRT presumably), and the Metrolink upgrades are all working together to plan an ideal complete system, leaving room for a northern LRT extension somewhere... but it feels like they're all happening in a vacuum. There seems to be some minimal coordination for these studies, but since this unfunded streetcar and any LRT projects are way off in the future, with the BRT being the closest thing on the horizon, the focus seems to be only on not interfering with the planned BRT. The potential LRT routes are far off in the future so it seems they won’t consider potential interference with those projects. There is also no funding for this streetcar, so it isn’t time to worry, yet.
|
|