|
Post by metrocenter on Jan 13, 2012 17:50:38 GMT -8
The FEIR has been made available this afternoon, a full week ahead of the announced publication date. It is available here.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Jan 13, 2012 17:50:52 GMT -8
The discussion became quite one-sided after the last series of meetings were over. Cut 5th Street station. Cut entrances. Value engineer this project to the point where it's public benefit has been seriously compromised. There is one thing to discuss: thumbs up or thumbs down. This project has not yet been approved by the Metro Board. And at $1.5 billion, this is by no means a no-brainer. People who were upset didn't think about the alternatives Metro was proposing. The big one was expanding the reach of 7th Street/Metro Center station to entrances at 6th street. It looked like the community blew that away. With an entrance on 6th street, the 5th street station is not really needed. Though nice, it's not worth it anymore.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jan 14, 2012 12:46:24 GMT -8
We had previously speculated how the new underground LT station would affect the current Gold Line, and how long the Gold Line operation would need to be shut down. Here is the answer:
In order to maintain rail service to the Eastside Gold Line during construction, Metro would construct a temporary bypass rail connection around the 1st and Alameda Streets intersection.Approximately one year after start of the construction contract, Metro Gold Line service would be temporarily halted for a period of approximately two to four weeks in order to connect the temporary bypass with existing track immediately south of the existing Little Tokyo/Arts District Station to existing track on 1st Street at Garey Street. During this period, rail service would continue to be provided to the existing Little Tokyo/Arts District Station from Union Station and Pasadena. However, a bus bridge would be needed from Little Tokyo/Arts District Station to all stations further east in the direction of Atlantic Station. Metro would evaluate the possibility of running train service from Atlantic Station to Pico/Aliso Station during this period. Once the temporary bypass is completed and tested, rail service would resume along the entire Metro Gold Line.
Following approximately three to four years of construction, another service interruption of approximately four to six weeks in duration would be required to construct the final section of tracks along 1st Street between Vignes and Hewitt Streets, and to connect the new rail line to the existing Metro Gold Line. During the service interruption, rail service could be maintained from Union Station to the existing Little Tokyo/Arts District Station. Again, a bus bridge would service stations along the Metro Gold Line east of Little Tokyo/Arts District Station.
A likely subsequent scenario would be completion and testing of the Regional Connector, then beginning service along the proposed East-West Line, allowing the new 1st/Central Avenue station to have regional rail service from the Eastside through the Regional Connector to 7th Street/Metro Center Station, continuing on to Santa Monica via the Metro Expo Line.
Once the new East-West Line service is operating, the bus bridge would be shortened to run only between the new 1st/Central Avenue station and Union Station for a period of approximately one year. During this time, construction and testing of the segment of the Regional Connector from the new 1st and Alameda junction to the existing embankment north of Temple Street, would be completed.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jan 14, 2012 13:04:49 GMT -8
So, here is the short version. A short disruption 1 year into construction to put in new bypass tracks South of LT, so the current Gold Line can continue operating. 2-3 years later, another disruption, so they can tie in the new RC tracks East of Alameda down 1st. Sometime later when the RC is then checked out, they will tie in the RC to the current GLEE extension. They will then run trains from the Westside to the current GLEE, with East-West service, like the final configuration will have. At that time, rail service between LT and Union Station will cease. They will have a bus bridge between the LT station and Union Station for one year Then finally they tie in the tracks North of the current LT station into the RC. At that point the RC will essentially be finished, and they can run both East-West and North-South service. The biggest problem I see here is that the newly established GLEE riders who have been going to Union Station will have to make the last hop over a bus bridge for an entire year. Yikes. And after that, they will still need to do a transfer at the new LT station to catch a North-South train into Union Station. But that won't be the case for probably 6 years at the soonest. RT
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Jan 14, 2012 21:15:52 GMT -8
If it were road infrastructure we were talking about, I guarantee the longest shutdown would be 3 days (long weekend). Look at the work on the SF bay bridge, which is someone similar to what theyd be doing here.
I can imagine the reaction now "Oakland drivers will utilize a ferry bridge for approximately 1 year"
But this is transit we're talking about. Whats an additional 20 minutes to the commute?
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jan 15, 2012 8:48:23 GMT -8
Thanks metrocenter for posting the link!
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jan 15, 2012 12:09:33 GMT -8
In all fairness, there's a difference between what you can do to detour around a road construction project and what can be done to detour around a rail construction project. Cars tend to be a bit more flexible in this regard than trains, and you rarely have to close an entire freeway like they did with cliche-mageddon.
The good news/ silver lining is, it does sound like Little Tokyo won't need to lose rail service during the construction period. It should either be linked to Union Station or to 7th/ Metro pretty much the entire time. I'm a little concerned that Little Tokyo may take an economic hit during the inevitable disruption of construction, so it would be good if Metro can at least keep a rail lifeline in place.
|
|
|
Post by joemagruder on Jan 15, 2012 15:30:43 GMT -8
I continue to not understand why some rail tasks have become so difficult and time consuming. Sometime in the 1950s, when PCCs were about to replace the double ended cars on the S and V lines, I watched a LATL track crew replace a section of straight track with a curve (to allow the PCCs to go around the new loop at 8th & Western). Everything was made ready, the old rail was cut out and the new rail lifted in, all between runs. Service never stopped. Why is that no longer possible?
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jan 15, 2012 15:57:58 GMT -8
I've been reading parts of the FEIR. The thing is huge, and full of technical details that's probably more interesting to bureaucrats, architects and engineers than to the general public. Still, there's some good stuff in there (also interesting comments from transit fans and Little Tokyo fans).
For example, Appendix J, the Station Planning Toolkit is a good bit.
I'm not a huge fan of transit plazas in general, but if we must have them, it's good to have guidelines for allowing events and retail at the plaza.
This section should be engraved in stone at MTA HQ:
"Transit stations should be designed not only for their primary function of travel to and from a community, but also as a center for community life."
Further down in the same document: "Place transit stops near high-activity areas like high retail streets and public places." "Encourage ancillary services, such as retail kiosks, in transit waiting areas to generate pedestrian activity." "Facilitate the provision of public amenities and services, such as retail locations, information kiosks, seating areas, meeting places and event venues."
These all seem like "well duh" to me, but it's funny how these things can get lost if not specifically mentioned.
EDIT: I must admit, I'm less happy about the section on avoiding pedestrian tunnels. I find it hard to believe that it would be more of a safety hazard than the street crossing it would replace.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jan 18, 2012 12:53:04 GMT -8
Very glad the pocket track on 5th/Flower is retained so we can add another Downtown station in the future.
Project time line
Draft EIS/EIR Published September 3, 2010 Draft EIS/EIR Comment Period September 3, 2010 to October 18, 2010 Metro Board Identifies Locally Preferred Alternative October 28, 2010 Final EIS/EIR Published Fall 2011 FTA Record of Decision Winter 2011 Final Design 1-2 Years Construction 4 Years Revenue Service Begins As early as 2019
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 8, 2012 13:21:57 GMT -8
Metro scheduled two workshops to take public input about the Regional Connector Final EIR. Yesterday (Tuesday 7 February) was the first of these workshops. The other workshop is tonight at 6:30, in Little Tokyo. These workshops are a good opportunity to hear Metro present its ideas, give your feedback, and get a sense of the mood (approving/disapproving) of the audience.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 8, 2012 15:58:18 GMT -8
I won't be able to attend tonight's meeting, but I would hope that the response would be mostly positive. There will always be a few "build absolutely nothing anywhere" NIMBYs (I would avoid calling Japanese Americans B.A.N.A.N.A.s), but overall I think that Metro has listened to the complaints.
Little Tokyo will be getting an excellent underground station, and while there are improvements which could still be made to the Regional Connector as a whole (more exits, more links to nearby projects), there is no reason for anybody to be upset.
Some business owners will be needing compensation for construction losses, but this station should be good to go, with Metro hopefully giving the community plenty of updates as this progresses.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Feb 9, 2012 12:28:31 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Feb 9, 2012 13:16:17 GMT -8
Looking through those presentations made me think of a segment that I saw on the PBS Newshour last night. It was about the economy in Germany, and how they export more than the US does while having a GDP that is about 1/4 the size. They spent a long time showing a company called HerrenKnecht. This company makes TBM's. The founder was this really cool German guy with a great attitude. Apparently the company used to specialize in cuckoo clocks, then adapted to changing market conditions by scaling up to building TBM's They built the TBM's used on the GLEE, and may end up sending a couple over for the RC before too long. Search "projects" and pick USA, it will be on the first page. They have 28 total pages of projects that they provided TBM's for. www.herrenknecht.com/projects/find-projects.htmlRT
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 9, 2012 13:49:34 GMT -8
There were maybe 50 attendees and 30 chairs. I would have been annoyed by this, except that the actual presentation only lasted like 10 minutes.
This was an "open house", which means there would be no speaking from the public, and very little from the project staff. We were invited to ask questions and view the graphic boards, after the 10-minute presentation was over.
The Metro Board will be voting for the project February 23.
I can't really say much, negative or positive, about the open house: it was pretty much a non-event (with free cookies).
|
|
|
Post by carter on Feb 9, 2012 14:16:25 GMT -8
There were maybe 50 attendees and 30 chairs. I would have been annoyed by this, except that the actual presentation only lasted like 10 minutes. This was an "open house", which means there would be no speaking from the public, and very little from the project staff. We were invited to ask questions and view the graphic boards, after the 10-minute presentation was over. The Metro Board will be voting for the project February 23. I can't really say much, negative or positive, about the open house: it was pretty much a non-event (with free cookies). Those were some good cookies though!
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 9, 2012 15:02:37 GMT -8
There were maybe 50 attendees and 30 chairs. I would have been annoyed by this, except that the actual presentation only lasted like 10 minutes. This was an "open house", which means there would be no speaking from the public, and very little from the project staff. We were invited to ask questions and view the graphic boards, after the 10-minute presentation was over. The Metro Board will be voting for the project February 23. I can't really say much, negative or positive, about the open house: it was pretty much a non-event (with free cookies). Those were some good cookies though! Yes, I regret not pocketing a few.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 9, 2012 15:27:43 GMT -8
well, free cookies are always good. If Metro wants to make friends in Little Tokyo, there are plenty of sweets and bake shops in the neighborhood they can buy from
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 13, 2012 11:14:09 GMT -8
Item is now on the agenda for the Metro Planning & Programming Committee meeting this Wednesday. It will go to the full Metro Board next Thursday 23 February. The item (it's long) begins as follows: 5. CONSIDER the following actions related to the Regional Connector Transit Corridor:
A. approving the Project Definition, which is based on the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) of a 1.9 mile Light Rail project with three stations previously designated by the Board in October 2010 and which incorporates several design refinements, including:
1. Creating an enhanced pedestrian walkway along the east side of Flower Street between 4th and 7th Streets;
2. Relocating the Little Tokyo/Arts District underground station to minimize property required and eliminate the cut-and-cover segment on 2nd Street in Little Tokyo originally required for construction;
3. Launching the Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) from the northeast corner of 1st and Alameda Streets, the Mangrove property formerly known as the Nikkei development, instead of 2nd Street;
4. Tunneling to Flower and 4th Streets in the Financial District, further reducing cut/cover in the area;
B. certifying the Regional Connector Transit Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/FEIR); The one surprise at the public workshop (which I failed to mention before) was that the route will be tunneled from Little Tokyo all the way to 4th/Flower. It was not clear to me how this will affect the overall project cost. Hopefully it didn't raise the cost of tunneling, thus siphoning even more funds away from essentials such as station entrances.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 13, 2012 14:53:18 GMT -8
That is an interesting point. I wonder if, once you hire a tunnel boring machine and get it into the ground, if it makes that big of a difference between boring through Little Tokyo and boring from Little Tokyo to the financial district.
The distance is not that huge as opposed to boring from Wilshire/ Western to Century City. I'm sure it costs more for every foot you dig, but the TBM itself should be a, um, "sunk" cost.
BTW, "tunneling the tunnel" is one of those annoying little bits of semantics that we really ought to avoid. It should be clear to all that the project should definitely be all-underground tunnel one way or another. Boring, rather than cut-and-cover, is definitely an important point for Little Tokyo.
That enhanced pedestrian walkway from 7th to 4th is also an interesting idea. I'd like to know more about that.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 21, 2012 16:07:24 GMT -8
Here's the Rafu Shimpo's take on the meeting last week: rafu.com/news/2012/02/little-tokyo-concerns-raised-at-metro-committee/Sorry, didn't see this until today or I would have posted earlier. Interesting in that Chris Komai of the Japanese American National Museum is now supportive (important, since JANM is a cultural institution with deep ties to a widespread community, which will be looking directly across at the construction site) and that Japanese Village Plaza has apparently hired lawyers to oppose it. Of course, this is Japanese Village Plaza's American Commercial Equities Management LLC landlords, and not the individual Japanese American/ Asian American shopowners and restaurant owners. To their credit, the management company has fixed up JVP considerably, but... One wonders if they've been following the Beverly Hills playbook of ignoring evidence on safe and modern tunneling techniques. Metro needs to print some brochures, "So You're Going To Have A Subway..."
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 23, 2012 8:55:49 GMT -8
^ Re: Japanese Village Plaza. The landowners have learned the lesson from the Gold Line Foothill payout: oppose oppose oppose. If you lawyer up, file multiple frivolous lawsuits, and dig your heels in deep, at the very least you'll get a hefty cash payment. Anyway, today is the monthly Metro Board meeting ( agenda), where the Board will considering approving the project ( item 5). Since the item is part of the "non consent" calendar, the project will be discussed by the board and public comments will be taken. Notably, the Planning and Programming Committee forwarded the agenda item to the full board "without recommendation". Meeting "begins" at 9 AM (more likely 9:30). As usual you can call and listen to the meeting at 213-922-6045 (a phone number which Metro is careful to NOT show on the website). EDIT: I am not hearing the meeting on the phone today.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Feb 23, 2012 9:21:36 GMT -8
^ Re: Japanese Village Plaza. The landowners have learned the lesson from the Gold Line Foothill payout: oppose oppose oppose. If you lawyer up, file multiple frivolous lawsuits, and dig your heels in deep, at the very least you'll get a hefty cash payment. Anyway, today is the monthly Metro Board meeting ( agenda), where the Board will considering approving the project ( item 5). Since the item is part of the "non consent" calendar, the project will be discussed by the board and public comments will be taken. Notably, the Planning and Programming Committee forwarded the agenda item to the full board "without recommendation". Meeting "begins" at 9 AM (more likely 9:30). As usual you can call and listen to the meeting at 213-922-6045 (a phone number which Metro is careful to NOT show on the website). EDIT: I am not hearing the meeting on the phone today. Item postponed to the March board meeting.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 23, 2012 14:39:30 GMT -8
There's a huge difference with the situation at Japanese Village Plaza and the situation with the Foothill Extension.
They don't need to buy any of JVP, like they did in Monrovia for the maintenance yard. They just need to tunnel under a small corner of it, and they're going to use Tunnel Boring for the whole Little Tokyo area. Except, of course, for the station and the wye. They will have to eminent domain the businesses there.
For what it's worth, I do think Little Tokyo deserves something for their likely troubles during the construction period. Metro may need to sit down with American Commercial Equities Management and discuss and explain things. JVP will be getting off a lot easier than the properties which will be bought up, or even JANM, which will have to put up with construction noise.
According to reports, the bigger threat to the Regional Connector — the stated reason why they've pushed back the approval a month — is the Financial District, which wants TBM as well.
They may have a point, I don't know how much more expensive the TBM can be. This may be another sit down, discuss things, explain, listen and come up with some sort of compromise.
The irony is that Flower is much wider than 2nd and the buildings in the area much less likely to suffer damage from cut-and-cover than some of the buildings in Little Tokyo.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 23, 2012 14:44:23 GMT -8
Now here come the legal threats from well-heeled Flower Street property owners. They are claiming that cut-and-cover under Flower Street will be "highly impactful and consequently violates the California Environmental Quality Act". Impacts do not themselves violate CEQA. CEQA requires only reporting of impacts, and evaluation of other alternatives in order to avoid these impacts. There is no such thing as an impact-free project. I do think Metro brought this on itself. In its defense, it has created a project which has support from throughout the county, and local support from the Little Tokyo community. But by removing the 5th/Flower station and upgrades to 7th/Metro, Metro has removed all of the substantial benefits of the project to the Financial District, while keeping all of the impacts. Of course, some property owners like the California Club could give two poops about the subway. They want hush-up cash from Metro. Ultimately, I don't think this group of property owners has a good case against Metro. I think the threat of legal action is being used as a negotiating tool to get either concessions or direct payoffs. We'll see how this gets resolved.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 23, 2012 15:38:11 GMT -8
Metro did offer to let the Financial District pay for a station in the Financial District. The district wasn't too keen on that idea, even though they probably could have afforded it.
Of course, a station in the district would have been cut-and-cover, and now they're saying that's precisely what they don't want.
Metro needs to sit down with these people. The complaint makes no sense; it makes much more sense to have TBMs in Little Tokyo than on Flower.
|
|
|
Post by erict on Feb 23, 2012 15:54:56 GMT -8
This is why things move at the speed of a glacier in Los Angeles, endless battles of one group over another. Sounds like people want money to me. But still, I kinda agree that there should be a station some day in the area (is it 4th street?).
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 23, 2012 19:31:31 GMT -8
I don't begrudge them the right the complain or make suggestions, that's how Little Tokyo ended up with a better wye. That's democratic.
However, I do think there needs to be some common sense and compromise injected into the conversation as well. This complaint seems to be lacking that, and hopefully Metro can talk to them.
And if funding TBMs is a problem, we might need to get more creative with that. Private investment in subway stations, opening up space for retail. If there is a 4th street station, link it with the existing underground development there.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Feb 25, 2012 8:25:02 GMT -8
Now here come the legal threats from well-heeled Flower Street property owners. They are claiming that cut-and-cover under Flower Street will be "highly impactful and consequently violates the California Environmental Quality Act". Impacts do not themselves violate CEQA. CEQA requires only reporting of impacts, and evaluation of other alternatives in order to avoid these impacts. There is no such thing as an impact-free project. I do think Metro brought this on itself. In its defense, it has created a project which has support from throughout the county, and local support from the Little Tokyo community. But by removing the 5th/Flower station and upgrades to 7th/Metro, Metro has removed all of the substantial benefits of the project to the Financial District, while keeping all of the impacts. Of course, some property owners like the California Club could give two poops about the subway. They want hush-up cash from Metro. Ultimately, I don't think this group of property owners has a good case against Metro. I think the threat of legal action is being used as a negotiating tool to get either concessions or direct payoffs. We'll see how this gets resolved. This is led by Christopher Sutton... one of the same guys who litigated on the Foothill Gold Line Monrovia Yard.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Feb 25, 2012 8:28:23 GMT -8
This is why things move at the speed of a glacier in Los Angeles, endless battles of one group over another. Sounds like people want money to me. But still, I kinda agree that there should be a station some day in the area (is it 4th street?). But if they are going to build a station box for the future they will have to cut open the street. Also if they need to put in a TBM to drill, they have to drop the machines in and pick it up in another area. This is a construction management tool.
|
|