|
|
Post by nickv on Oct 13, 2007 22:18:06 GMT -8
Well, The OC has another MIS on the table... If anybody's driven through The OC south of SR 55 during rush hour or weekends, you know that things get tough, especially for those who work in Irvine or Aliso Niguel who live in northern OC. Getting from Laguna Hills to Santa Ana during the PM rush hour on the I-5 can seem longer than even the stop-and-go journey on Wilshire Bl. I had a chance to skim through the report on OCTA's Web site. The bad news: Lots of lots of many road and freeway expansion projects at hand including the expansion of the I-5 through Irvine and the El Toro Y and the creation of new roads through the undeveloped foothills...Car-centered development waiting to happen! Keep in mind the I-5 through Irvine was expanded to 5 lanes plus one HOV lane (each way) between the SR-55 and the 'Y' just over a decade ago. The 'Y' is already 26 lanes wide. The Good News: OCTA wants cities to go TOD at Metrolink Station stops, provide feeder service for Metrolink trains, and perhaps add a Lake Forest Metrolink Station near the traffic- clogged El Toro Road. A big draw for the Lake Forest station is the fact that transit riders at the Laguna Hills TC can connect to 30 minute Metrolink Service via a short ride on either Line 89 or even a proposed rail feeder. OCTA will also study alternatives to double track the LOSSAN rail corridor to the San Diego County Line, which could mean more trains south to Oceanside in the long term future. "Metro Rapid" style BRT for major corridors are also on the table. www.octa.net/socmis_study.aspx |
|
|
|
Post by tonyw79sfv on Oct 14, 2007 7:04:42 GMT -8
Looking at the 2006 OCTA LRTP, people in the OC should not expect to have what LA has for the next few decades...urban rail transit. The best they can do is increased Metrolink service and BRT. They're even taking a long time getting their BRT system running, the first one I believe is Harbor Boulevard complementing route 43 won't be starting until sometime in 2008. Then in 2009 it's 17th/Westminster to Long Beach complementing route 60; and the "28 mile" route in 2010, somewhat following route 57 and going west towards the Irvine transportation center. So while LACMTA would wrap up it's 8 year Metro Rapid campaign next year, OCTA is just starting theirs, albiet slowly; and we're still building more rails, not roads.
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Oct 14, 2007 22:07:07 GMT -8
My biggest fear with OC's car-centered focus is how their agenda gets "pushed" onto LA county. For example, look at the mess the OC created on the 5 freeway bottleneck of OC & LA boundaries. Now, LA has to push the I-5 extension ahead of possible public transit projects. OC is causing a ripple effect.
I can't wait 'til PeakOil hits and the OC gets f***ed over.
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Oct 14, 2007 22:09:46 GMT -8
Looking at the 2006 OCTA LRTP, people in the OC should not expect to have what LA has for the next few decades...urban rail transit. The best they can do is increased Metrolink service and BRT. They're even taking a long time getting their BRT system running, the first one I believe is Harbor Boulevard complementing route 43 won't be starting until sometime in 2008. Then in 2009 it's 17th/Westminster to Long Beach complementing route 60; and the "28 mile" route in 2010, somewhat following route 57 and going west towards the Irvine transportation center. So while LACMTA would wrap up it's 8 year Metro Rapid campaign next year, OCTA is just starting theirs, albiet slowly; and we're still building more rails, not roads. I think OC's "BRT" is comparable to LA's Metro Rapid program (i.e. not Orange Line). The Orange Line is far better than LA's Metro Rapid due to the grade seperation. You won't see bus-only lanes or grade seperations for public transportation in car-heaven. |
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Aug 11, 2008 20:46:45 GMT -8
Update on the OCTA South OC MIS
OCTA’s South County Major Investment Study
Well, the MIS has got some much needed transit proposals combined with (yes...) more OC freeway widenings and an idea that looks rather crazy. First, let's get to the idea that appears crazy first. Just to make it clear, OCTA has indicated that this a conceptual idea for now, but why does it look crazy? Let's go ahead and see:
That's right. How about another OC freeway or highway connecting SR 73 at the I-5 to Antonio Pkwy through the foothills. The high school where I graduated back in 1997 may end up near the corner of two highways (bad enough being next to the I-5), and several properties (and I mean several) might be reduced to pavement. We're talking some heavy duty eminent domain! I don't know how far this will go. Lot's of opposition and NIMBY-ism to come if this concept idea becomes a real proposal.
Other projects are summarized here and include more freeway and highway widenings, but also include some much needed investments in better bus and rail service.
One idea is to expand the OC Bravo! BRT system to connect the Tustin Metrolink Station to San Juan Capistrano with stops at major activity centers.
July 18, 2008 - The Capistrano Dispatch
Vol. 6, Issue 29, July 18-24, 2008
THE LATEST: The concept of a 3-mile arterial traffic connector linking the Interstate 5–State Route 73 merge with Antonio Parkway was one traffic solution discussed Tuesday night at a town hall meeting presented by the Ladera Ranch Transportation Club. The east-west “beltway” concept is part of the Orange County Transportation Authority’s South County Major Investment Study, a long-range planning document looking at traffic and circulation needs and possible solutions by 2030. “Everything in the MIS is just conceptual at this point,” said OCTA spokesperson Joel Zlotnik.
Several San Juan Capistrano residents were on hand to share their opinions. Currently the 3-mile connector concept has about 2 percent engineering to see what relief it could provide, said Tami Warren, OCTA’s public outreach project manager. According to Warren, a primarily surface route could cost up to $550 million, while one utilizing mainly tunnels would run about $800 million.
WHAT’S NEXT: Planners of the MIS will present the study to the OCTA board in September for a vote.
FIND OUT MORE: See the presentation slides at www.thecapistranodispatch.com.
—Norb Garrett
|
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Oct 18, 2008 17:08:26 GMT -8
Capistrano Concerned by Proposed HWY 74 Ortega Widening
Lots of commuters use this route as a short cut to bypass traffic on SR-91 into the Inland Empire; that's a reason why traffic gets so bad as the route enters San Juan Capistrano, but I can see a much better alternative already. Both the Inland Empire and OC need to address the massive job and affordable housing imbalance. Cities like Moreno Valley, Murrieta, and Temecula have started to address getting some white-collar jobs into town; However job-rich OC needs to get some affordable housing so that those full time Platinum Triangle restaurant workers and window washers can afford to live in OC and not be forced to commute from the Inland Empire.
October 16, 2008 Print
By Jonathan Volzke, The Capistrano Dispatch
The San Juan Capistrano City Council on Tuesday, October 21 will consider a resolution opposing widening Ortega Highway to six lanes through town. The widening was considered in the OCTA’s “South County Major Investment Study” approved by the OCTA board on Friday, October 10.
The OCTA board is made up of 17 voting members, including the Orange County Board of Supervisors. Laguna Niguel City Councilmember Paul Glaab sits in the south-county cities’ seat.
The report, which was prepared over two years with input from city leaders, city staffers, residents and business leaders, notes that a new connection between the San Diego Freeway and Antonio Parkway or the 241 South would provide a transportation benefit. But planners noted the benefit might not be worth the tremendous cost of the project.
With Caltrans already planning to widen Ortega to four lanes from the Hunt Club to the city’s eastern limits, the OCTA plan notes Ortega could be widened to six lanes to carry more traffic. The final report notes, however, that tremendous public outreach would needed first, and local leaders would have to sign off on the project.
That’s not likely to happen, and Capistrano city leaders plan to eliminate any question on Tuesday. “Community members have objected to a six-lane highway in that such a project will likely result in numerous house relocations, destruction of a scenic thoroughfare, and compromise of historic structures along the roadway,” the staff report for Tuesday’s City Council meeting notes.
|
|
