|
Post by James Fujita on May 30, 2011 15:55:13 GMT -8
I know you're just kidding, but geez, don't even joke about that Little Tokyo's still getting used to having light rail (I've been telling friends about it). They're still squeamish about the construction. At the very least, they can start the construction from the south end, where the impact will be less and the construction will be less complicated. (Dig a hole, dig a hole, dig a hole...)
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on May 30, 2011 16:04:19 GMT -8
And none of this ever happens quickly. What we think might takes days takes weeks and what looks like weeks is months. This seems like months so by extension could be years. This gets back to one of my pet peeves with regard to large scale construction like this that proves disruptive to both the community and the line itself. Assume they do need to use a bus bridge, and can't run a single track operation for whatever reason. If that is the case, why then wouldn't they attempt to minimize the required bus bridge time by extending the construction hours? They could work longer days at a minimum, or even multiple shifts if the work isn't too disruptive noise wise. They could plan on doing the quieter work after normal working hours. The marginal cost of paying to speed up the work can't be that much more? You could avoid overtime pay by staggering the guys work shifts. Tunneling projects run 24/7, and when they rebuilt the 10 freeway after the earthquake they ran 24/7 there. RT
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on May 30, 2011 16:10:26 GMT -8
Well construction is still a while from now and the benefits far outweigh the pain of construction.
|
|
|
Post by tobias087 on May 30, 2011 16:35:57 GMT -8
This of course also speaks to the regional/long term vs. project-by-project planning approach. They should have gotten Little Tokyo right in the first place! Same thing applies to an underground Expo/Crenshaw station.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 30, 2011 17:56:45 GMT -8
And none of this ever happens quickly. What we think might takes days takes weeks and what looks like weeks is months. This seems like months so by extension could be years. This gets back to one of my pet peeves with regard to large scale construction like this that proves disruptive to both the community and the line itself. Assume they do need to use a bus bridge, and can't run a single track operation for whatever reason. If that is the case, why then wouldn't they attempt to minimize the required bus bridge time by extending the construction hours? They could work longer days at a minimum, or even multiple shifts if the work isn't too disruptive noise wise. They could plan on doing the quieter work after normal working hours. The marginal cost of paying to speed up the work can't be that much more? You could avoid overtime pay by staggering the guys work shifts. Tunneling projects run 24/7, and when they rebuilt the 10 freeway after the earthquake they ran 24/7 there. RT I think that all things being equal that Metro very much prefers to keep the line open as much and as long as possible, but IIRC that was the intention for the Blue/Expo tie-in as well. There was even some statement to that effect and some limitation on how many closures there would be and how long they would last. Most of the work was supposed to be done at night and closures were only supposed to be some limited number near the end. But when they found out how much extra money that would cost they switched to what I assume was some reasonable compromise where the line would close much more often, but only on weekends.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on May 30, 2011 18:24:07 GMT -8
This of course also speaks to the regional/long term vs. project-by-project planning approach. They should have gotten Little Tokyo right in the first place! Same thing applies to an underground Expo/Crenshaw station. For what it's worth, I'm not sure they could have gotten Little Tokyo "right in the first place", given that the Regional Connector wasn't on the radar just a few years ago, and Little Tokyo went from being on the Red Line extension plan to the Gold Line extension. Hindsight is always perfect. EDIT: I would add that "getting it right" took a lot of community discussion, Transit Coalition brainstorming and a recession which killed the Nikkei Center. The new Little Tokyo station will be better than the old one as it will be underground and nearer to the middle of Little Tokyo. But we have to admit that it will be disruptive, and Metro should do everything it can to make that disruption as bearable as possible.
|
|
|
Post by Transit Coalition on May 30, 2011 19:11:15 GMT -8
And none of this ever happens quickly. What we think might takes days takes weeks and what looks like weeks is months. This seems like months so by extension could be years. This gets back to one of my pet peeves with regard to large scale construction like this that proves disruptive to both the community and the line itself. Assume they do need to use a bus bridge, and can't run a single track operation for whatever reason. If that is the case, why then wouldn't they attempt to minimize the required bus bridge time by extending the construction hours? They could work longer days at a minimum, or even multiple shifts if the work isn't too disruptive noise wise. They could plan on doing the quieter work after normal working hours. The marginal cost of paying to speed up the work can't be that much more? You could avoid overtime pay by staggering the guys work shifts. Tunneling projects run 24/7, and when they rebuilt the 10 freeway after the earthquake they ran 24/7 there. RT Projects that disrupt unique channels of flow traffic have to be thought through very carefully. Since the actual construction is several years off, you can bet that there will be a number of scenarios developed to keep an operating railroad in service. You can be mindful that the engineers involved aren't working to keep the railroad down from public use any more than necessary. This situation brings to mind the 405 weekend shutdown. People are asking, "Can you just shut down a lane or two?" The 405 team doesn't have crushed motorists in mind as an option, so now people are having to grapple with a closed freeway for a weekend. The Downtown Connector brings its own unique set of challenges to the table. Whatever solutions are necessary to bring a finished railroad on line will be what the users and builders are ultimately faced with. This does bring to mind that the new Metro Executive Officer of Regional Rail, Don Sepulveda will make an interesting speaker at an upcoming TTC meeting. Remember, one of the goals of this discussion board is to bring knowledge to those reading, so we can ask the important questions and get things done the best way possible. About 5-7 years ago, some folks wanted to build a BRT route down Crenshaw and TTC members kept asking for a rail option. We got that and Crenshaw serves as the extension of the Green Line south along Aviation and now the trench or tunnel at the end of the runway is a reality, not just an idea that we brought up.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 31, 2011 13:45:37 GMT -8
I found one thing interesting in the video. Around 25:19, Mr. Farley says that Metro is looking at a concept of opening the west part of the alignment for revenue service before the Little Tokyo junction is completed: "We also want to make sure that the portions that are ready for service, ready to receive trains, are actually beginning on the Flower side, the 7th Street/Metro side in, so that we don't have the junction, that junction at Little Tokyo, holding up actually running revenue trains there and prolonging the impact to Gold Line passengers in Little Tokyo." I think I heard this right, pls. correct me if I'm wrong. It would certainly be interesting to have Blue and Expo Line trains terminating at the new Little Tokyo station. By doing this, folks in LT would always have a station open. And although the direct link to the Gold Line would be severed, LT riders would be able to ride trains to 7th/Metro and transfer to the rest of the rail system.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on May 31, 2011 13:55:37 GMT -8
Seems plausible to open DC in phases if the direction of construction/tunneling starts from 7th Street and works itself up to 2nd Street. It would help a lot from psychological standpoint to have the new underground Little Tokyo station open and in operation to Expo and Blue lines before the old surface station is demolished.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on May 31, 2011 15:14:16 GMT -8
Seems plausible to open DC in phases if the direction of construction/tunneling starts from 7th Street and works itself up to 2nd Street. It would help a lot from psychological standpoint to have the new underground Little Tokyo station open and in operation to Expo and Blue lines before the old surface station is demolished. Not only that, based upon the current engineering plans, the most important piece/component to the connector is that pocket track that is being built between 7th Street Metro and the Bunker Hill Station. That pocket track would significantly aid in operations of the line so that even if this is the only portion operating for the DRC, this will enable quicker and more reliable turning back of Blue and Expo trains.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 31, 2011 16:08:07 GMT -8
BTW, according to the latest Measure R status presentation: "Administrative Draft of the FEIS/R was submitted to FTA for review and comment on Monday, May 9, 2011." Per the project website, the FEIR is expected to be completed by the end of this year.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 31, 2011 17:46:39 GMT -8
Great catch metrocenter! Even after you both pointed it out and typed it, I had to listen three times to be sure. It makes sense I guess, although it doesn't really make sense to build a station at Little Tokyo capable of turning the 20 to 24 trains per hour as would be necessary. I guess that they could turn half the trains (in Blue/out Expo?) at Bunker Hill and the other half (in Expo/out blue?) at Little Tokyo.
Then this way Little Tokyo (hopefully) gets continuous or mostly continuous service throughout construction. Not sure what it means for East LA though. They may get bustituted for awhile.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on May 31, 2011 21:27:52 GMT -8
I like this idea. Build the southern half of the Connector first, especially if that part is important, and give Little Tokyo its underground station before you build the connection at 1st/ Alameda, especially if that sounds like the tricky bit. Best of all, you keep people moving in and out of Little Tokyo for as long as possible. Give people a taste of why this project is being built. Of course, you wouldn't have to turn every train around at Little Tokyo....
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 3, 2011 7:31:16 GMT -8
Last chance to give input before Metro staff releases the FEIR this summer and makes its final recommendations to the board! Community Update MeetingsMetro is currently completing the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Final EIS/EIR) for the Regional Connector Transit Corridor project. Ahead of the Summer 2011 release of the Final EIS/EIR, Metro is hosting three community meetings to present the designated Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) and project refinements accomplished since October 2010. Please mark your calendar and plan to join us at one of these upcoming meetings: Tuesday, June 21, 2011; 11:30 a.m. - 1 p.m. Colburn School of Music, Olive Hall 200 S Grand Ave, Los Angeles Wednesday, June 29, 2011; 6:30 - 8 p.m. Japanese American National Museum 369 E First St, Los Angeles (This meeting will be broadcast through Ustream) Thursday, June 30, 2011; 6:30 - 8 p.m. Los Angeles Times, Community Room 202 W First St, Los Angeles Meeting format and content will be identical. For more information: Each meeting will have Japanese, Korean, and Spanish interpreters and materials available.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 21, 2011 10:41:21 GMT -8
The first of three community meetings is now taking place, at the Colburn School up on Bunker Hill.
Working in Glendora, I'm obviously not at the meeting. I'll have to attend one of the other meetings next week.
Anybody who goes today, please post an update.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Jun 21, 2011 22:14:10 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 22, 2011 12:34:18 GMT -8
Thanks Carter! (BTW, it's spelled "voila!")
So the Mangrove site (NE First/Alameda) will be the new starting point for the TBMs? Interesting.
I guess it makes sense, given the tunnel's curve up from Second Street, which was revised to avoid destroying the south side of the Office Depot block. They will have to tunnel at least to the Office Depot block (to get past the Japanese Village block), and there's not enough space on the Office Depot block for TBM station. Thus, the long-vacant Mangrove site.
Another benefit: from what I can see, the TBMs should be able to begin their journey without at all disrupting the existing Gold Line service. In fact, the existing line shouldn't see any disruption until they start building the portals themselves.
|
|
K 22
Full Member
Posts: 117
|
Post by K 22 on Jun 22, 2011 12:54:32 GMT -8
I just looked at the PDF and I guess the names haven't been finalized yet since the generic "2nd/Hope", "2nd/Broadway" and "1st/Central" names are still being used.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Jun 22, 2011 17:31:53 GMT -8
The new, gentler curve from 2nd Street to the Y is much better. The initial plans would have led to very slow speeds thru that curve, and more squealing wheels and maintenance costs.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Jun 22, 2011 20:03:43 GMT -8
Thanks Carter! (BTW, it's spelled "voila!") So the Mangrove site (NE First/Alameda) will be the new starting point for the TBMs? Interesting. I guess it makes sense, given the tunnel's curve up from Second Street, which was revised to avoid destroying the south side of the Office Depot block. They will have to tunnel at least to the Office Depot block (to get past the Japanese Village block), and there's not enough space on the Office Depot block for TBM station. Thus, the long-vacant Mangrove site. Another benefit: from what I can see, the TBMs should be able to begin their journey without at all disrupting the existing Gold Line service. In fact, the existing line shouldn't see any disruption until they start building the portals themselves. Good points all around. You'd think all those years of French and I'd have known to contract it to "voila"
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 23, 2011 7:22:38 GMT -8
^ I assumed you meant the familiar "voila", rather than the uncontracted "look there". Mon erreur!
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jun 23, 2011 7:44:08 GMT -8
Yes, hiding most of the TBM related construction staging in the Mangrove site behind that fence is a great idea. The "TBM soil removal" trucks won't even be really impacting the LT street traffic, assuming the trucks then go East on Temple if I'm reading slide #23 correctly.
Looking forward to the FEIR, and the detailed construction sequence based on this. I guess they have to dig the cut-and-cover station boxes before the TBM goes through, so the basic sequence might be something like: 1. Dig the holes for the 3 stations. 2. Cover the 2nd/Broadway box with temporary covering like they did on the Red Line, to allow street traffic to flow. 3. The other two stations aren't directly under primary streets, so the box can stay open? 4. At this point, above ground construction is essentially complete for many months while they run the TBM West from the Mangrove site, first boring one tunnel then boring the other one, also starting at Mangrove. 5. Construction of stations, tunnel finish work, track laying then commences, during which I believe the 2nd/Broadway temporary cover can remain in place.
All in all, if the above is correct, then the primary disruption until the actual wye construction and tie-in will be the digging of the 2nd/Broadway station box.
If the wye is cut-and-cover, then that is going to be a major disruption unless they put a temporary street cover over that site too, which seems like the way they should go.
RT
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Jun 23, 2011 8:08:00 GMT -8
I'm a little confused on one point. Will the line be built in a manner that could add a 5th Street station later as an infill station or is that gone forever?
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 23, 2011 8:19:06 GMT -8
If the wye is cut-and-cover, then that is going to be a major disruption unless they put a temporary street cover over that site too, which seems like the way they should go. They could do the wye box before or after TBM tunneling. The first approach would involve digging out the wye box, covering it, and then driving the TBM into the box to start tunneling. The second approach would have them finish the tunnels, and then dig out the remaining box cut-and-cover. Maybe the tunnels could be expanded into a box? (I have no idea if this is feasible from an engineering point of view.) One other thing to consider: the possibility (described by the Metro guy a few months ago at the TTC meeting) of completing and opening the entire Connector except the wye and Gold Line tie-in. The purpose of this would be to eliminate any break in service to Little Tokyo. I don't know if this is at all feasible, but it obviously would affect the scheduling of the project components.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Jun 23, 2011 8:57:30 GMT -8
I'm a little confused on one point. Will the line be built in a manner that could add a 5th Street station later as an infill station or is that gone forever? At the recent Regional Connector meetings, staff insisted that they wouldn't preclude the future construction of the 5th St. station, although they didn't offer any details. At the most recent Transit Coalition meeting, Brandon Farley did indicate that the pocket track might be located near 5th St. and the pocket track structure could later be converted to a station.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jun 23, 2011 9:00:02 GMT -8
So they might actually open service to the new underground LT station and the Blue/Expo lines would then terminate at LT instead of 7th/Flower. Then they would finish up the wye, and get as much as possible done before demolishing the current LT station and tying everything together. The only disruption to the current Gold Line would be the time between the current station demolition and the resumption of (direct, not bus-bridged) service when the entire DC is completed. I would imagine that they will be pretty focused, from a construction staging standpoint, on minimizing that time period. Makes total sense, you don't want to disrupt any active service any longer than absolutely required. Anybody want to hazard a guess as to how long the disruption could be minimized to assuming they go that route?
My guess: 2 months, assuming that the 1st and Alameda St portals can be built without causing the disruption. That might be the temporary track idea someone mentioned.
Given the problems with the performance of the Expo Phase I contractor, maybe they could use some kind of incentive/penalty system for that last bit of work?
RT
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jun 23, 2011 9:50:33 GMT -8
I'm a little confused on one point. Will the line be built in a manner that could add a 5th Street station later as an infill station or is that gone forever? At the recent Regional Connector meetings, staff insisted that they wouldn't preclude the future construction of the 5th St. station, although they didn't offer any details. At the most recent Transit Coalition meeting, Brandon Farley did indicate that the pocket track might be located near 5th St. and the pocket track structure could later be converted to a station. Also, according to the PDF, the portion on Flower between 4th St and Wilshire will be cut and cover so they can install knockout panels as they go (for example, near the pocket tracks). It's a bit more difficult to reserve openings for future station space with TBM because the tunnel wall has to be reinforced and encased in concrete as part of the process.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jun 23, 2011 14:41:49 GMT -8
I'm glad that they are thinking far enough ahead that they can build a station in the Financial District if funding shows up in the future.
Also glad to hear (if they do go forward with this plan) that Little Tokyo will be the "end of the line" for a while and that they won't lose station access for that long.
I can't wait to see "Little Tokyo" on a subway station sign, even if technically speaking it might be more accurate to say semi-subway or an underground light rail station. If it needs escalators or stairs to enter, it's a subway station ;D
There's some interesting potential for extra visitors in Little Tokyo that the neighborhood stores and restaurants ought to fully exploit, especially since business tends to go down during construction projects.
Send us your weekend riders, the people who fall asleep on trains, people making connections...
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jul 22, 2011 9:27:48 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jul 22, 2011 13:07:42 GMT -8
Wow, There is a tremendous amount of material to go through. The first couple things that popped out were from the "Construction Impacts" section:
1. The TBM's will start at the Mangrove site, and go all the way to 4th/Flower. I believe part of that had been planned to be cut&cover.
2. They state that the interruption to the Gold Line will only be to install temporary tracks. Note the plural: tracks. Implying two.
RT
|
|