|
|
Post by numble on May 18, 2020 14:03:43 GMT -8
So its looking likely that Metro will commission a new transit feasibility study for transit options in the San Gabriel Valley. This would replace the SR-60 Gold Line extension that was eliminated. Based on the wording of the board report, it looks like they would provide $635.5 million in Measure M funds from 2022-2035, and $2.14 billion to $2.19 billion for this project in 2053-2057. metro.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4539340&GUID=B6044D05-C6B6-47F8-9EA2-9728A6B71B1F&Options=ID%7CText%7CAttachments%7COther%7C&Search=&FullText=1Because there is a dedicated pot of funding, this can be an opportunity for something new and realistic in the San Gabriel Valley, which has been dominated by planning for the Foothill and SR-60 lines for the last 20 years. Some prior San Gabriel Valley rail studies that never made it: |
|
|
|
Post by fissure on May 19, 2020 8:52:26 GMT -8
It seems like the obvious thing would be to improve the San Bernardino Line via double-tracking (the part in the middle of the 10 should be the only mechanically difficult part, and maybe they can schedule around it), high platforms, and electrification. Turf wars and general NIMBYism are likely to get in the way, though.
Adding some infill stations on either Metrolink or the busway would also massively improve the usefulness of north-south bus routes in the western SGV.
|
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on May 19, 2020 11:08:39 GMT -8
The most logical plan is to bring the Purple line across the LA river to Boyle Heights with potential to extend it further but that won't get the SGV council excited.
The alternative to electrify and beef up Metrolink SB line. But again, it seems like logic rarely has anything to do with SGV transit planning.
My third preference will be to add a new light rail line starting from 7th St Metro Center and thru the Garment and Wholesale districts (the most under served and yet transit dependent part of DTLA) and cross the LA River at 6th street then follow Soto north to Valley Blvd (or Garvey) to El Monte Bus Station then follow Valley again to Punte Hills Mall. The western terminus has potential to extend west beyond DTLA.
|
|
|
|
Post by bzzzt on May 20, 2020 13:43:14 GMT -8
I'd figure that the Metrolink SB will be used by CA HSR (whenever that is), so why spend money on that, when someone else will eventually give you the money for double-tracking and electrifying.
For projects that are more towards the middle of the SGV, and will probably get more support than edge projects, perhaps bus rapid for Rosemead Blvd and the 60. The Silver Line would be fantastic if Metro could get a ROW.
|
|
|
|
Post by joquitter on May 20, 2020 14:06:55 GMT -8
The most logical plan is to bring the Purple line across the LA river to Boyle Heights with potential to extend it further but that won't get the SGV council excited. The alternative to electrify and beef up Metrolink SB line. But again, it seems like logic rarely has anything to do with SGV transit planning. My third preference will be to add a new light rail line starting from 7th St Metro Center and thru the Garment and Wholesale districts (the most under served and yet transit dependent part of DTLA) and cross the LA River at 6th street then follow Soto north to Valley Blvd (or Garvey) to El Monte Bus Station then follow Valley again to Punte Hills Mall. The western terminus has potential to extend west beyond DTLA. If the WSAB Alternate G option is chosen, it would mirror your proposal from 7th Street all the way until 7th and Alameda, I could see them leaving a branch for further expansion to the East like you mentioned. |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on May 21, 2020 17:58:23 GMT -8
I had WASB Alt G in mind when I made that post.
The DTLA portion can be shared by both SGV and WASB line and then they branch off to the Westside again so you have a two cross town lines that share a trunk in DTLA:
Santa Monica Blvd/Sunset Blvd to DTLA to Artesia (WASB)
Venice Blvd/Pico Blvd to DTLA to SGV
|
|
|
|
Post by andert on Apr 13, 2021 9:11:39 GMT -8
Is there any update on when this feasibility study will be finished or results released? And with a call for 'strategic unfunded' projects for the first time since 2009, due this summer, will whatever the SGV COG adds to the list be immediately given more favorability as the SR60 replacement? In the 2009 list, the only thing in the area was the silver line concept. But I can see them including that, Rosemead BRT, and a number of other things in the list this year.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Apr 13, 2021 10:35:10 GMT -8
Is there any update on when this feasibility study will be finished or results released? And with a call for 'strategic unfunded' projects for the first time since 2009, due this summer, will whatever the SGV COG adds to the list be immediately given more favorability as the SR60 replacement? In the 2009 list, the only thing in the area was the silver line concept. But I can see them including that, Rosemead BRT, and a number of other things in the list this year. When they went to get bids, they said they wanted to finish the study in September 2022, but they had expected to award the contract February 2021. They received a lot of bids and still haven’t awarded a contract. I think they will award it in the next 2 months though. So I guess end of 2022 is when the study would be done? I did a Twitter thread on past studies for the area. John Fasana had suggested something on Valley Blvd. and I think Hilda Solis has previously said she supported a Valley Blvd. BRT. la.streetsblog.org/2018/10/29/metro-embarks-on-another-bus-rapid-transit-study/ |
|
|
|
Post by andert on Apr 13, 2021 12:59:23 GMT -8
Thanks! I wonder what would happen to the El Monte busway if there was a 2nd BRT line right above it. I guess It'd just serve as an express... though the metrolink is kind of doing that too. Seems like there'd be a lot of duplicate service in the area. Though adding local service to Valley would be very useful, obviously.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Apr 19, 2021 10:04:52 GMT -8
The SGVCOG plan to award the contract for the transit study on May 20, there might be some hints on what they plan on studying at the time of the award. I have no knowledge on whether there would be any information on what they plan to study. Their contract bidding system indicates a lot of proposals were received, and sometimes bidders try to stand out by throwing out preliminary ideas in their proposals, to show that they've done some thinking about the work in advance, for free.
|
|
|
|
Post by andert on Apr 21, 2021 9:01:38 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Jun 10, 2021 18:26:40 GMT -8
SGVCOG had their Transportation Committee meeting today, and there were some very limited hints on what they may study for the San Gabriel Valley Transit Study, as it is just getting started.
|
|
|
|
Post by brady12 on Jun 12, 2021 12:04:39 GMT -8
That would be tremendous as a grade separated LRT line. It would make a quick one seat ride from Azusa to LAX. Which would be TREMENDOUS.
I think Metro SHOULD (but won’t) take the two proposed east side routes and divide them up. Have the Purple Line go from Union to Arts to Olympic Blvd briefly and then onto Whittier Blvd out to Whittier. Have the Gold LRT Line follow the Northern route. The new industry line connects anyone in the area who wants to go [N <> S].
|
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jun 14, 2021 12:24:09 GMT -8
That ride from Azusa to LAX will not be "quick" if it is light rail. Will likely take 65-70 minutes with all the stops. But I think 45 minutes from Punte Hills Mall to LAX is possible.
I think SGV N-S rail line is a good idea but they should start on corridors that already have lots of bus demand like Atlantic.
That Industry line as proposed should be a BRT line. The area is far too sprawly to warrant a light rail line. It will be just like another Gold Line Foothill - low ridership white elephant.
Edit: I don't want to sound negative because I'm not... The website where the Industry line is details is very well thought out and has integrated approach, including suggestion for Metro to takeover SB and Riverside lines from Metrolink to offer bi-directional all day service, something that could really transform how people travel in SGV.
Envisioning this line as an extension for Green line also make it an easier sell in terms of funding. The Gateway council maybe more inclined to share the cost too and push Norwalk to accept the extension to Norwalk Metrolink.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Jun 14, 2021 13:06:53 GMT -8
That ride from Azusa to LAX will not be "quick" if it is light rail. Will likely take 65-70 minutes with all the stops. But I think 45 minutes from Punte Hills Mall to LAX is possible. I think SGV N-S rail line is a good idea but they should start on corridors that already have lots of bus demand like Atlantic. That Industry line as proposed should be a BRT line. The area is far too sprawly to warrant a light rail line. It will be just like another Gold Line Foothill - low ridership white elephant. Edit: I don't want to sound negative because I'm not... The website where the Industry line is details is very well thought out and has integrated approach, including suggestion for Metro to takeover SB and Riverside lines from Metrolink to offer bi-directional all day service, something that could really transform how people travel in SGV. Envisioning this line as an extension for Green line also make it an easier sell in terms of funding. The Gateway council maybe more inclined to share the cost too and push Norwalk to accept the extension to Norwalk Metrolink. Hopefully, since they handed the study to a consultant without giving them very much direction, we can get a serious consideration of where a transit line makes sense in the region. The last 20-30 years have seen the region focus on the Foothill extension and SR-60 routes, which weren't really focused on where lines made sense based on ridership, but following existing freeways/railroad ROWs. |
|
|
|
Post by andert on Jun 14, 2021 13:36:27 GMT -8
That ride from Azusa to LAX will not be "quick" if it is light rail. Will likely take 65-70 minutes with all the stops. But I think 45 minutes from Punte Hills Mall to LAX is possible. I think SGV N-S rail line is a good idea but they should start on corridors that already have lots of bus demand like Atlantic. That Industry line as proposed should be a BRT line. The area is far too sprawly to warrant a light rail line. It will be just like another Gold Line Foothill - low ridership white elephant. Edit: I don't want to sound negative because I'm not... The website where the Industry line is details is very well thought out and has integrated approach, including suggestion for Metro to takeover SB and Riverside lines from Metrolink to offer bi-directional all day service, something that could really transform how people travel in SGV. Envisioning this line as an extension for Green line also make it an easier sell in terms of funding. The Gateway council maybe more inclined to share the cost too and push Norwalk to accept the extension to Norwalk Metrolink. Hopefully, since they handed the study to a consultant without giving them very much direction, we can get a serious consideration of where a transit line makes sense in the region. The last 20-30 years have seen the region focus on the Foothill extension and SR-60 routes, which weren't really focused on where lines made sense based on ridership, but following existing freeways/railroad ROWs. In that vein, I'd love if Metro commissioned a study for a 'master plan' on what an ideal transit system for LA county looks like based on ridership patterns and residential/commercial hubs, and then work backward and build the individual pieces in a way that feeds into that master plan. I know that's sort of what they were talking about doing with a more holistic approach to planning, but I don't think we've gotten any details of what that actually means or what that process looks like, have we? |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Jun 14, 2021 14:01:58 GMT -8
Hopefully, since they handed the study to a consultant without giving them very much direction, we can get a serious consideration of where a transit line makes sense in the region. The last 20-30 years have seen the region focus on the Foothill extension and SR-60 routes, which weren't really focused on where lines made sense based on ridership, but following existing freeways/railroad ROWs. In that vein, I'd love if Metro commissioned a study for a 'master plan' on what an ideal transit system for LA county looks like based on ridership patterns and residential/commercial hubs, and then work backward and build the individual pieces in a way that feeds into that master plan. I know that's sort of what they were talking about doing with a more holistic approach to planning, but I don't think we've gotten any details of what that actually means or what that process looks like, have we? Yeah, it was recommended in their strategic plan update, but I really don't expect we'll see anything for awhile. Probably once many of the current projects are out of the EIR process (they have like 8 transit projects currently in the EIR process), they will have more people/time to look at the future. |
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Jun 14, 2021 14:09:30 GMT -8
That ride from Azusa to LAX will not be "quick" if it is light rail. Will likely take 65-70 minutes with all the stops. But I think 45 minutes from Punte Hills Mall to LAX is possible. I think SGV N-S rail line is a good idea but they should start on corridors that already have lots of bus demand like Atlantic. That Industry line as proposed should be a BRT line. The area is far too sprawly to warrant a light rail line. It will be just like another Gold Line Foothill - low ridership white elephant. Edit: I don't want to sound negative because I'm not... The website where the Industry line is details is very well thought out and has integrated approach, including suggestion for Metro to takeover SB and Riverside lines from Metrolink to offer bi-directional all day service, something that could really transform how people travel in SGV. Envisioning this line as an extension for Green line also make it an easier sell in terms of funding. The Gateway council maybe more inclined to share the cost too and push Norwalk to accept the extension to Norwalk Metrolink. That's just the truth, though, lol. At least put something on Atlantic and Rosemead/Lakewood before even considering rail on Azusa |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jun 14, 2021 17:35:49 GMT -8
SGV is perfect for high quality BRT grid - lots of wide roads, suburban density, concentrated employment zone along a few key corridors.
If I was in charge of SGV transit, I would build several large bus transfer portal and focus on high frequency BRT on all the major roads so you can get across town easily. Then you can transfer to local buses at one of the major transfer points to neighborhood street. Similar to how they revamped the bus system in Auckland and Brisbane.
|
|
|
|
Post by brady12 on Jun 16, 2021 2:58:07 GMT -8
That ride from Azusa to LAX will not be "quick" if it is light rail. Will likely take 65-70 minutes with all the stops. But I think 45 minutes from Punte Hills Mall to LAX is possible. I think SGV N-S rail line is a good idea but they should start on corridors that already have lots of bus demand like Atlantic. That Industry line as proposed should be a BRT line. The area is far too sprawly to warrant a light rail line. It will be just like another Gold Line Foothill - low ridership white elephant. Edit: I don't want to sound negative because I'm not... The website where the Industry line is details is very well thought out and has integrated approach, including suggestion for Metro to takeover SB and Riverside lines from Metrolink to offer bi-directional all day service, something that could really transform how people travel in SGV. Envisioning this line as an extension for Green line also make it an easier sell in terms of funding. The Gateway council maybe more inclined to share the cost too and push Norwalk to accept the extension to Norwalk Metrolink. Maybe not quick but quick enough. It’s a way for people from SGV to avoid downtown to get to LAX (and SoFi). I think it would be a worth while project. It would especially make sense if they took my suggestion and built east side LRT on the northern alignment and put HRT on Whittier. That way this line would act as a N/S connection. I can dream can’t I? Also, I feel as if as far as costs go this would be one of the cheaper lines built - even with it being all grade separated. If they could come up with the money I think it would do better in ridership than many here would anticipate |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Jan 21, 2022 12:07:12 GMT -8
It looks like these are the 15 options that will be studied for transit service in the San Gabriel Valley. A lot of BRT options, and a couple of LRT options.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on May 11, 2022 11:30:40 GMT -8
Update on SGV transit study. They have narrowed down the options for further study to 7 options (down from 15). 3 East-west corridors and 4 north-south corridors. Since it is a lot of money and they are only looking at bus options, I think they may implement more than 1 option. Link to tweet. |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on May 13, 2022 11:47:55 GMT -8
This is an easy call - put the money on the two most logical and under served corridors, one N-S and one E-W:
E-W: Concept 5 Atlantic Station to Pomona via Valley and Colima
N-S: Concept 10 Sierra Madre station to CSULB via Rosemead/Lakewood
Concept 1 (DTLA to Pomona via Valley) is also good but it is too close to Silver Line and Metrolink San Bernardino. I would prefer to upgrade those services instead. It also ends in Union Station which is less optimal for cross town commutes form SGV to West side (transfer from BRT platform to Purple line is a long walk).
Concept 5 is less duplicative than Concept 1 and also address the relative lack of transit option in South SGV. Concept 5 terminal at Atlantic Station also makes sense because you want to funnel as many passengers on to cross town rail before DTLA as possible so they can make the trip with one less transfer. And also transfer at 7th St is a lot easier than Union Station.
Last and not the least, Concept 5 can be upgraded to light rail eventually relatively easy. Concept 1 will probably require rail underground and you have a serious problem at Union station trying to accommodate more line.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on May 13, 2022 14:20:39 GMT -8
This is an easy call - put the money on the two most logical and under served corridors, one N-S and one E-W: E-W: Concept 5 Atlantic Station to Pomona via Valley and Colima N-S: Concept 10 Sierra Madre station to CSULB via Rosemead/Lakewood Concept 1 (DTLA to Pomona via Valley) is also good but it is too close to Silver Line and Metrolink San Bernardino. I would prefer to upgrade those services instead. It also ends in Union Station which is less optimal for cross town commutes form SGV to West side (transfer from BRT platform to Purple line is a long walk). Concept 5 is less duplicative than Concept 1 and also address the relative lack of transit option in South SGV. Concept 5 terminal at Atlantic Station also makes sense because you want to funnel as many passengers on to cross town rail before DTLA as possible so they can make the trip with one less transfer. And also transfer at 7th St is a lot easier than Union Station. Last and not the least, Concept 5 can be upgraded to light rail eventually relatively easy. Concept 1 will probably require rail underground and you have a serious problem at Union station trying to accommodate more line. Maybe they will do 3 projects since it is a lot of money for bus projects. One thing going for Concept 1 is that the City of LA is looking at putting bus lanes and/or a BRT on the portion of Valley that is in their city, from the 710 tunneling funds. Link to tweet. |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on May 17, 2022 15:18:58 GMT -8
True, if there is money, then all three concepts are good.
|
|
