|
Post by trackman on Mar 18, 2010 19:35:43 GMT -8
Back to the Blue Line and the original post question, in an ideal world, one without money constraints or construction issues, I'd like to see the line fully grade separated and possibly converted to third rail with longer stations.
If those new "Breda" vehicles are apart of the line.... larger seats.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Apr 29, 2010 11:16:41 GMT -8
Reconfigure Long Beach section: replace the loop with a tunnel under Pine Avenue, with stations at 5th Street, 1st Street and Pike/Convention Center/Shoreline Village. I would imagine the line would emerge from underground somewhere south of Pine and Ocean, due to the steep cliff at that location. So maybe the terminal station would be elevated, possibly in front of the Convention Center.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Apr 30, 2010 0:12:33 GMT -8
Metrocenter, if we are going to grade separate the line, we need to do it all the way back to Willow Station. We could tunnel from there, but perhaps elevated grade crossings and stations would be an option down to Anaheim.
Double-tracking the segment between Anaheim station and the 1st street / transit mall station, and eliminating the loop, would also be a big improvement. Right now the short one-way loop up Pacific and across 8th is very slow, due to three tight turns and multiple lights with no signal priority. Having the trains go straight back up Long Beach Blvd would make transfers easier and would cut several minutes off of trip times. Along with well-designed signal priority or preemption, these changes could make the average speed 50% faster, for a few million dollars, rather than 500 million for tunnels and underground stations.
I agree that a subway thru downtown would be beneficial for Long Beach. But if I had to pick one corridor for now to improve in Long Beach, I would consider 7th street, which is rather narrow for at-grade light rail and already supports very frequent bus service, while traveling thru densely developed communities, and terminates at CSU Long Beach and the Long Beach VA hospital.
|
|
|
Post by macross287 on May 8, 2012 19:19:17 GMT -8
The Blue Line is finally getting its long desired station refurbishments REPORT on Blue Line Platform Alignment Rehabilitation, Aspet Davidian, Director Major Project Engineer (Jonathan Langteau presenting) The Blue Line is in the process of going through planned refurbishments. This capital improvement project was presented two years ago and has Board approval. Its goals are to give the Blue Line its first major rehabilitation since opening in 1990. The object is to improve the service and Metrorail’s image by improving lighting, adding amenities, and responding to the needs of our increased number of riders, while complying with current ADA and Metro design criteria requirements. These requirements are standard for what Metro would like to see stations look like so all patrons have the opportunity to enjoy the environment and stations. We will replace light fixtures, add CCTV, and replace corroded water lines, damaged electrical conduits and VMS devices. We will repair and repaint rusted canopies and guardrails, replace broken tiles, and create paving and edges at station platforms. We will expand existing canopies to match design criteria – platform extensions were made to accommodate 3-car trains, and platforms were not canopied during that time. Our Blue Line platforms are 20 years old and need to be updated with new ADA requirements, including benches, and we are designing our platforms to be uniform throughout the system, complying with new codes and standards. www.metro.net/board/Items/2012/05_May/20120510OtherSectorGATItem3.pdfHopefully this along with the concurrent Nippon Sharyo car rehauls will do good in lifting some of the negative stigma around this line
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 8, 2012 23:02:03 GMT -8
It's a three (3) parter:
I. Move the transit mall from 1st St. to Ocean Bl. What was the wisdom behind building it on 1st St. anyways?
II. Double track all the way to the transit mall, Pacific Av., 8th St. and back onto Long Beach Bl.
III. Extend double tracks from Long Beach Bl. east onto Ocean Bl. to the Livingston Dr./2nd St. entrance of Belmont Shores.
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on May 10, 2012 11:28:36 GMT -8
"L" it south of Washington. pure and simple... and obviously expensive.
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on May 10, 2012 22:58:54 GMT -8
From riding Metrolink daily I see their many grade separation projects going on where they essentially put the street under the tracks while the tracks remain at ground level. There is no downtime for the rail line and only a speed restriction is upheld during construction. I could see this happening on the Blue Line or even Expo Line to keep the speeds up and separation from traffic.
I find that the Blue Line would benefit from fences closer to the tracks, a feature of the more modern lines, seems to further discourage entering the right of way.
I'd like to see some Orange Line/Expo Line style landscaping in the right of way to beautify the area as a sign of solidarity for the community.
An express track(s) on the dedicated right of way for express service would be very forward thinking for this as a vital link between the county's two biggest population centers.
An end to the benign neglect of the Blue/Green Lines compared to the Gold Line or Eastside Extension, it's got no schedule displays, bad lighting, often no pylons, sometimes the maps are out of date, and there's lacking connectivity to neighborhoods like for example, no easy connectivity to the casino at Artesia Station and no announcement of attractions like Watts Towers or Historic Pine Street or that the Compton Civic Center is a stone throw from the station.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on May 11, 2012 4:36:34 GMT -8
From riding Metrolink daily I see their many grade separation projects going on where they essentially put the street under the tracks while the tracks remain at ground level. There is no downtime for the rail line and only a speed restriction is upheld during construction. I could see this happening on the Blue Line or even Expo Line to keep the speeds up and separation from traffic. I find that the Blue Line would benefit from fences closer to the tracks, a feature of the more modern lines, seems to further discourage entering the right of way. I'd like to see some Orange Line/Expo Line style landscaping in the right of way to beautify the area as a sign of solidarity for the community. An express track(s) on the dedicated right of way for express service would be very forward thinking for this as a vital link between the county's two biggest population centers. An end to the benign neglect of the Blue/Green Lines compared to the Gold Line or Eastside Extension, it's got no schedule displays, bad lighting, often no pylons, sometimes the maps are out of date, and there's lacking connectivity to neighborhoods like for example, no easy connectivity to the casino at Artesia Station and no announcement of attractions like Watts Towers or Historic Pine Street or that the Compton Civic Center is a stone throw from the station. I like most of your suggestions. I have some mild concerns about putting streets below the tracks. This generally makes pedestrian connections very unpleasant, as it requires walking along a concrete/carbon monoxide hell with low visibility and fast, noisy cars zooming by. It's also not as appropriate in the cases where the tracks are paralleled by a surface street, unless you're planning on cutting off connectivity for that street. Targeted grade separation of the streets or rail on a case by case basis is a very good idea in my mind, though. I think express tracks would make a huge difference in ridership, as the blue line is pretty crowded and it takes a long time to get from one end to the other, which are where the job densities are highest.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 11, 2012 14:04:41 GMT -8
The idea of express tracks has been brought up since the times of the old message board. I still continue to think it's a great idea. I wonder if Metro is looking for the Blue Line to hit a certain number of daily boarding before they entertain the idea of acquiring the rest of the ROW to turn into dedicated express service. The day is coming when the Blue Line will hit 100k so hopefully that's the number they need.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on May 11, 2012 14:13:13 GMT -8
The idea of express tracks has been brought up since the times of the old message board. I still continue to think it's a great idea. I wonder if Metro is looking for the Blue Line to hit a certain number of daily boarding before they entertain the idea of acquiring the rest of the ROW to turn into dedicated express service. The day is coming when the Blue Line will hit 100k so hopefully that's the number they need. I doubt they're going to do any changes to the long range plan on that basis, but I could be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 11, 2012 14:55:38 GMT -8
Hopefully, Metro doesn't wait until the Blue Line hits 200k daily boardings like NYC did with the Lexington Line. Of course, if/when the Blue Line achieves 200k daily boardings, I would hope Metro has its eyes not just on express service but also duplicate service an Atlantic Av., Rosemead Bl./Lakewood Bl., Pacific Bl./Long Beach Bl., or on the Vermont corridor with a Red Line extension south to the Green Line (maybe beyond).
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on May 11, 2012 16:30:56 GMT -8
I've commented in favor of a Rosemead/Lakewood light rail line for some time now, but by the time all the other worthy projects are finished, I'll probably be visiting with Haywire Mac at the Big Rock Candy Mountain. Rosemead/Lakewood would answer one of the criticisms of the Pacific Electric--it was too "radial", great if you were going to downtown LA, but not if you wanted to go from Monrovia to El Monte.
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on May 11, 2012 17:12:53 GMT -8
Instead of building an express track, why not take it a step further and build a new Metrolink line on the ROW that runs from the main Metrolink tracks at around Olympic to Long Beach? I believe the Santa Ana Corridor is going to use the northern part of the ROW, but the majority of the route definitely looks wide enough for 4 tracks. The ROW ends by turning west along the 405 freeway and 32nd st.
There's plenty of parking lots in that part of Long Beach for both a station and parking structure. Plus, it could help revitalize that area, along with Signal Hill to the south.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 15, 2012 16:04:47 GMT -8
Bob, it's interesting that major areas/centers like Pasadena/Glendale/Burbank or Long Beach/Santa Ana/Fullerton were not interconnected. Was it the wisdom/practicality of the day or was it that no one saw the potential? I'm under the impression that if we were in the hay-day of it (late 30's/early 40's), something like the Green Line would never have come to pass.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on May 15, 2012 17:10:32 GMT -8
By the late 30's/early 40's, PE was already on a downward trend. One could go into great detail about the PE, starting with the last extensions, which were built in the mid-1920's. Even before the Temple City extension was added to the Alhambra-San Gabriel Line, PE had replace its weaker local lines in Pasadena with buses, indeed making the largest motor coach purchase in the US in 1923. The plethora of municipal bus lines in the southwest part of LA County (Culver City, Gardena, et al.) can be traced to PE abandonments around 1940. One route that never had rail service was and is Monrovia to El Monte. After World War II, a returning veteran bought a used bus (probably a Ford Transit), got a PUC certificate, and began service. I remember seeing the bus parked in front of the Monrovia Library, awaiting its next run to the PE station in El Monte. Today we have either Metro or Foothill serving this route, but it used to be a "mom and pop" operation. Regarding Pasadena-Glendale-Burbank: this has been discussed for years, and at one time was served by the Asbury bus lines. Building rail between these locations would be quite challenging, considering the hilly terrain. I could go on at great length about transit history in Southern California, but I think the greatest influence would be Henry Ford and his Model T, making motoring "affordable" to the majority of citizens.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 16, 2012 11:54:25 GMT -8
Bob, thank you for that. I like history so I find historical accounts to be not just informative, but also interesting. At least now I know that it's hay-day was the early-mid 1920's.
I know I'm going way off topic, but I'll make this the last question, but it'll have several parts: were there any Pacific Electric or even L.A. Rail Lines that were discontinued and then brought back again (as rail)? How about abandoned tracks that were re-purposed as part of another line later?
|
|
|
Post by masonite on May 16, 2012 12:21:59 GMT -8
Bob, thank you for that. I like history so I find historical accounts to be not just informative, but also interesting. At least now I know that it's hay-day was the early-mid 1920's. I know I'm going way off topic, but I'll make this the last question, but it'll have several parts: were there any Pacific Electric or even L.A. Rail Lines that were discontinued and then brought back again (as rail)? How about abandoned tracks that were re-purposed as part of another line later? The Gold, Blue, and Expo lines were all former PE Lines, although each of them goes off the PE line at some point (i.e. Expo between SC and Downtown). Although maybe I am misreading your question if you are asking about PE lines that were discontinued and then came back as PE lines again?
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on May 16, 2012 17:43:23 GMT -8
The Gold Line, although parts of it parallel PE routes, is, once it crosses the LA River, the Santa Fe 2nd District. At one time there was discussion about making it a Metrolink diesel-powered commuter train route, which could have been put into service much sooner on the old Santa Fe tracks (as opposed to building a high-platform double track electric railway), but Metro chose the light-rail mode. There is still a coterie of railfans who think the Gold Line was a mistake, and the Metrolink mode should have been adopted, but most of them have realized that trolley power to Pasadena and beyond is here to stay. The only major BNSF freight customer west of Laverne, Miller-Coors Brewing, will be served by a third track constructed by the Foothill Extension Authority to maintain freight service from the east.
Regarding PE lines coming back: The Red Line subway follows the PE Hollywood Blvd. line from Vermont to Highland, and then the San Fernando Valley line from Highland to North Hollywood. "Yellow Car" lines would include the "V" line on Vermont Ave. from Wilshire to LA City College, and the "P" line on E. First St. from Alameda to the Boyle Heights tunnel. The Gold Line follows the LARy "W" line route in Highland Park near the Southwest Museum. Fan trips on the "W" in the early 1950s would sometimes be scheduled to have a "photo stop" that would coincide with the Santa Fe "Chief" going by on a lower level than the streetcar tracks.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 16, 2012 19:33:20 GMT -8
Masonite, Bob: What I was trying to find out was whether or not there was ever an instance of a PE or LARy Line being discontinued/abandoned and then months or maybe a few years later it was re-established in its entirety or were portions of these former lines ever brought back as extensions of other lines? I don't have the facts nor do I know for sure, but was the 5 Line such an instance?
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on May 16, 2012 23:30:53 GMT -8
I'm reasonably familiar with the PE, through the works of Ira Swett and other historians, and I can think of only one PE service that, once abandoned, was revived. The Newport-Balboa line had several freight-only periods in the 1940's, and finally saw the absolute end of passenger service in 1950. The Glendale-Burbank Line went through a period of severely reduced rail service, augmented by buses in the late 1930's, but PE was ordered to restore full rail service, which stayed in effect until final abandoment (under Metro Coach management) in 1955. Regarding LARy (Yellow Car) lines, there were articles in Timepoints, the ERHA publication, many years ago, but I've never seen a comprehensive book on the narrow-gauge lines.
|
|
|
Post by transitfan on May 17, 2012 5:46:02 GMT -8
Concerning former PE/LARy lines that are now Metro rail lines, not exactly the same thing, but the 105 Freeway (and the Green Line) follow the PE Santa Ana ROW from just east of Alameda St to just past the 710 interchange. This includes the Green Line Long Beach Blvd station.
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on May 17, 2012 11:38:12 GMT -8
I suppose Metro could upgrade Blue Line bridges to carry the extra 18000 lbs of a 3 car Breda train
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 17, 2012 12:38:39 GMT -8
Thank you Bob, I'm going to look up the sources you referenced.
Oh gawd, Metro isn't expecting to receive anymore of those awful Breda cars, are they? That would be tragic. I think that in the historical scope, they'll go down as the worse equipment Metro has ever had the displeasure of owning and operating.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 17, 2012 12:58:11 GMT -8
Thank you Bob, I'm going to look up the sources you referenced. Oh gawd, Metro isn't expecting to receive anymore of those awful Breda cars, are they? That would be tragic. I think that in the historical scope, they'll go down as the worse equipment Metro has ever had the displeasure of owning and operating. If those go down as the worst, I'll take it! They aren't perfect, but they work ok. Other agencies have had to deal with much worse.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 17, 2012 13:30:38 GMT -8
LOL, I'm sure there are many fine examples of terrible equipment out there. And yes, at least they're operational and do what they have to do. Metro could literally be stuck with a fleet of Mr. Hankys on steel wheels on tracks. I'm just not a fan of the Bredas.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on May 17, 2012 16:02:46 GMT -8
Regarding new cars, recent reports say the Metro is buying their next batch of light rail cars from Kinki-Sharyo, so the 50 Bredas they have now are "it" as far as Breda is concerned. Remember the car factory that Breda wanted to build south of downtown LA? Metro finally decided that there were too many question marks and loopholes in the deal, and said "no." Regarding the extra weight of the Bredas--bridges and similar structures are usually built with an ample safety factor, so that shouldn't be a concern. There seems to be a faction of local transit fans who have a major dislike for Bredas; the only problem I see with them is the noisy air-conditioning blowers. Aesthetically, I give them preference over the Siemens cars.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 17, 2012 20:29:30 GMT -8
LOL, I don't hate the Bredas as much as I'm loyal to the old fleet of LRV's. However, since they're slated for "retirement" in the next so many years and the Bredas now run exclusively on the Gold Line, I kind of have to accept it...kicking and screaming, but I'll accept it. (As though I had a choice LOL!)
I just thought of an indirect improvement: acquire the ROW between Washington and Slauson/Randolph, use it temporarily for LRV storage; and when the Slauson/Harbor Subdivision or Randolph/Whittier ROW are developed into their own respective lines, the new lines can run on those tracks so that they don't interfere with Blue Line operations by overlapping lines on the same tracks. Think of it as avoiding another Expo/Blue Line track merger.
|
|
|
Post by Elson on May 17, 2012 22:42:22 GMT -8
I think it's cheaper and easier to run more trains with shorter headways than to have 4+ car trains on the line. With the Downtown Connector built, the Kinki-Sharyo Cars added to the fleet and the fact that all LRVs can now run on all the LRT lines, this is will be easier than ever to do.
As far as improving the line, replace those damn windows on the Nippon Sharyo cars. They're all badly etched. Also clean them more thoroughly, some of them really stink. Other than that, everything's ine.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on May 18, 2012 1:28:32 GMT -8
I think it's cheaper and easier to run more trains with shorter headways than to have 4+ car trains on the line. With the Downtown Connector built, the Kinki-Sharyo Cars added to the fleet and the fact that all LRVs can now run on all the LRT lines, this is will be easier than ever to do. The highest variable cost is the salary of the train driver. From an operations perspective, it's pretty much the same cost no matter how many cars on the train (provided union contracts allow only one driver).
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 18, 2012 12:38:06 GMT -8
I still remember when the Blue Line was limited to 2 car trains. When the platforms were augmented to accommodate 3 car trains, it was a big whoopty-do. I don't think augmenting the platforms to accommodate 4 cars is going to work out since it would require digging up 7th/Metro to extend the platforms and who knows what chaos it's going to conjure up or how much it would cost (I imagine it's expensive though).
On the other hand, the 3 car limitation keeps the doors open for the creation of parallel service on other corridors when the Blue Line maxes out (that may be coming in the next decade or so). Vermont Av., which is already in the LRTP, may suddenly move up a tier while Avalon Bl., Pacific Bl./Long Beach Bl., and Atlantic Av. may start garnering some indirect interest.
|
|