|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 24, 2009 10:51:41 GMT -8
This is the latest view of the Expo Line Trousdale Station, as of yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 24, 2009 18:14:20 GMT -8
So, in my opinion, they can open the line to La Brea next year at the least. The only thing which is holding the project back there is the Farmdale pedestrian overpass, but hopefully this could be constructed quickly.
I guess cascade of ramps will be better than elevators for the pedestrian overpass, despite the negative aesthetics.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Apr 24, 2009 18:27:02 GMT -8
This is the latest view of the Expo Line Trousdale Station, as of yesterday. So far, the invert slab on the Exposition side has just about reached the east end of the USC/Expo Park station. At the meeting, I was told the invert slab in the underground section was done. I checked the slabbing on the Flower side today and sure enough, the slabwork is now working its way out of the Flower portal towards Jefferson.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Apr 24, 2009 20:18:00 GMT -8
I guess cascade of ramps will be better than elevators for the pedestrian overpass, despite the negative aesthetics. Here's the pedestrian bridge built over the Blue Line and Union Pacific tracks and Long Beach Avenue at 53rd Street, north of Slauson.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 29, 2009 16:58:48 GMT -8
Expo Line to open in May 2010The catch is that this is the Expo Line in Shanghai. It's interesting that there is no distinction between HRT and LRT in Shanghai, with trains always using overhead power, same type of trains, and apparently mostly grade-separated for both HRT and LRT because of capacity needs and density. If we had a similar system in Los Angeles, it would be much easier to extend the Red Line and connect it with the LRT system. Note that there is already an Expo Line in Vancouver. So, the LACMTA Expo Line will be one of the three Expo Lines in the world, once it opens in late 2010. Note that the name Expo is coined from Exposition Boulevard, which is in turn coined from Exposition Park. The line was otherwise known mostly as the Santa Monica Air Line throughout the history. In fact the original name for Exposition Boulevard was Santa Monica Avenue. See the map from 1880 below, the year USC was established: Note that L.A. & I.R.R. on the map is the original narrow-gauge (3' 6") steam railroad built in 1875 -- Los Angeles and Independence Railroad. It's the second oldest railroad in Southern California. (Los Angeles and San Pedro Railroad, now Alameda Corridor, was built in 1869.) It was bought by Southern Pacific in 1877 and converted to standard gauge (4' 8.5"). Also note the street railroads on Figueroa/Jefferson/Trousdale (then Wesley) and on Vermont (then Childs). If they didn't change the name of the street from Santa Monica Ave to Exposition Blvd, Expo Line would perhaps be named Santa Monica Line. The line is crucial in that the entire Westside (the Westside in historical context meaning the area between Downtown Los Angeles and Santa Monica) was built around this railroad. What other better place to build a light-rail line in LA therefore?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Apr 30, 2009 10:27:50 GMT -8
It's been a while since we have last visited the Expo Line. This morning on my work to work, I decided to take some pics. I found out that they have started the falsework for the La Cienega bridge (not pictured). Not too far National Blvd bridge has mainly been finished. Utility relocation seems to have been mostly completed; although, they are still working on the power lines east of La Cienega, which have been delaying the project. This should be finished in a month or two. The remaining utility relocations are at Farmdale, which is a hub of storm drains and sewers (therefore prohibiting any trench there) and by USC, which is another major sewer and storm-drain hub because of the presence of the university. Elsewhere along the line, track installation will start very soon. The right-of-way bed is ready at most locations with ballast-retaining curbs cast. It's interesting that the tracks will be several feet above grade rather than street level. This should provide good visibility of the surroundings. The station platforms are also high above the street and people will be looking high above the cars at Western Ave (not pictured). They are preparing the forms at La Brea for casting the bridge: What struck me was how far the platforms for the Crenshaw Station are from Crenshaw Blvd, perhaps about 300 ft or more. This must be because of the wyes for the planned Crenshaw LRT. I wish they had considered the same for Phase 2 Westwood Station and Sepulveda Station, where there might be spurs and hence wyes on these streets. This is also Crenshaw Blvd but east split platform. Note the huge church on the left. Note that these are near-side platforms and the trains will therefore come to a full stop before they enter the crossing. Considering how far these platforms are from the street, I expect there will be significant delays at Crenshaw due to lack of gates. It's a big mistake not to have gates at Crenshaw, not from a safety point of view but from an operations point of view.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on May 10, 2009 23:13:02 GMT -8
Because we always need more construction photos.... Falsework for the La Brea bridge and aerial station (5/7/09). Trackway east of Crenshaw (3/20/09).
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on May 11, 2009 22:29:19 GMT -8
I've said it before, and I'll say it again--for us old-timers who saw the Pacific Electric tracks torn out, there's no such thing as too many construction photos. Back when the original Gold Line was under construction, my wife would e-mail me a shopping list and I'd buy the items requested at Trader Joe's in South Pasadena, after first checking out the progress on bringing electric rail service back to the San Gabriel Valley.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 12, 2009 10:33:06 GMT -8
Well, until the tracks are laid and the ballast is poured, we won't get the feeling of the Air Line being reborn. So, I'm impatient to see this. Hopefully this will happen in Segment B (Vermont Ave - Harcourt Ave) sometime this summer.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on May 12, 2009 21:44:23 GMT -8
View from Trousdale Walk toward the Figueroa underpass, late this afternoon, outline of the station platform on the near left.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 12, 2009 23:29:24 GMT -8
Trousdale Walk Parkway. Nice pic.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on May 13, 2009 21:38:41 GMT -8
Some pics of my own: The invert slab is progressing out to the other portal towards Jefferson Blvd., as well (you can see the freshest concrete at the north end of the trench): Construction crews have also taken a considerable bite out of the freeway embankment at Jefferson to make room for the station there:
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 14, 2009 7:14:53 GMT -8
Nice aerial pic!
|
|
|
Post by erict on May 14, 2009 12:48:54 GMT -8
nice pictures. I still don't understand what will go on top of the trench - will it be capped or exposed with those beams that span across?
|
|
|
Post by Jason Saunders on May 14, 2009 14:05:03 GMT -8
Today, I saw the beginnings of false work at La Cieniega (a few wooden X structures) and concrete being poured over the Ballona Bridge. Batteries were dead in the camera so I couldn't take a picture.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the cross beams displayed in the above photographs are temporary until the retaining walls have been properly formed. I also believe the I beams will be cut off at ground and encased in concrete.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 14, 2009 21:24:49 GMT -8
Answering erict and SAUNDERS, both the crossbeams and I beams & steel plates held by the I beams will be completely removed when the structure is completed. They all are temporary supports for shoring (temporarily supporting the trench from collapsing).
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 16, 2009 10:52:41 GMT -8
I've driven by the Exposition right-of-way yesterday. I'm quite frustrated with the progress of construction. Very little has happened in the last two weeks. The La Brea bridge construction has completely stalled due to untold reasons. The La Cienega bridge falsework construction also has mysteriously stalled. They said they would drill for the Venice/Robertson supports last month but there is still nothing going on there. Nothing can be done at Farmdale until the new application is submitted to CPUC and approved.
So, I don't have much hope in any segment of Phase 1 opening any time in 2010. It could be 2012 before Phase 1 is completed to Venice/Robertson. A possible nightmare is the project budget exploding with inflation and volatile economy and requiring hundreds of millions dollars more to complete Phase 1. This is not good at all.
Let's hope Phase 2 doesn't run into the same problems and opens by 2014.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 16, 2009 11:08:13 GMT -8
^ I agree. My WAG is 7th/Metro to Crenshaw by no later than June 2011 and Phase I completion by the end of 2011. I hope for earlier, but it's hard to be optimistic.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on May 16, 2009 11:50:07 GMT -8
I've wondered if the La Brea bridge pour will be done all at once, after the western piers and abutment are built. Perhaps they're only building the forms for now on the east side, but not planning to pour it in sections?
La Cienega is still waiting for DWP to finish removing power lines in order to build the piers on both sides closest to the boulevard.
The other night I saw work going on in multiple locations. The critical path to at least open to Crenshaw seems to be the new Flower bridge over the freeway, and there is new activity in the freeway median.
The six at-grade stations are in various stages of preparation or construction, and should be done in time. It still seems plausible to me for Crenshaw in 2010 and Culver City in 2011.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on May 16, 2009 13:07:12 GMT -8
I've driven by the Exposition right-of-way yesterday. I'm quite frustrated with the progress of construction. Very little has happened in the last two weeks. The La Brea bridge construction has completely stalled due to untold reasons. The La Cienega bridge falsework construction also has mysteriously stalled. They said they would drill for the Venice/Robertson supports last month but there is still nothing going on there. Nothing can be done at Farmdale until the new application is submitted to CPUC and approved. So, I don't have much hope in any segment of Phase 1 opening any time in 2010. It could be 2012 before Phase 1 is completed to Venice/Robertson. A possible nightmare is the project budget exploding with inflation and volatile economy and requiring hundreds of millions dollars more to complete Phase 1. This is not good at all. Let's hope Phase 2 doesn't run into the same problems and opens by 2014. Those are all past Crenshaw and I agree those aren't far along and there is no chance they will be done in 2010, but 2011 is still 2 plus years away so that is a long time. I still hope it can be open to Crenshaw in 2010 as I don't see any major holdups here except for the Flower overpass Darrell mentioned. I am worried about Phase II as well. 2014 would be great, but I imagine this will be a tough slog.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 16, 2009 14:54:29 GMT -8
People seem excited about the Crenshaw Station, studying it when they drive by. It's a unique station in the sense that it's at-grade and in a large open area. There is no other light-rail station (including Expo) in LA similar to it I believe. You can see the platforms when driving along the two-lane Exposition Blvd. The platforms are also set back from Crenshaw with the future Crenshaw Line in mind. It will make a good connection to the Crenshaw community and to the south of it if the Crenshaw Line is built. So, I'm excited to see the line open to Crenshaw.
The best case for opening to Crenshaw seems to be late 2010, say December 31, 2010. I was told that there are serious construction and operation conflicts in opening the line in segments; so, they will have to work that out.
I expect the Phase 2 to go smoother with less CPUC and utility-relocation problems. The nearing June 4th is the date when the grade separations will be announced. I'm personally preferring at-grade to preserve the neighborhood in Cheviot Hills and Rancho Park but I won't hold my breath on it. I can't imagine owning a house with a 25-ft-tall wall in front of it and with a train on top of the wall.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on May 16, 2009 15:51:32 GMT -8
I can't imagine owning a house with a 25-ft-tall wall in front of it and with a train on top of the wall. The good thing is that the few houses closest to Overland and Exposition are set back quite a distance - around 100 feet or more - and landscaping in front of the retaining walls can also help a lot. As an example, the image below is from the intersection of Richland and Selby, just south-west of Overland and Exposition.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 16, 2009 17:43:23 GMT -8
^^ You can't convince me that having a wall in front of my house and a heavy concrete structure on my street is a good thing. It makes the neighborhood unpleasant and decreases the home values. But I agree that it's not the end of the world if it has to be done, and mitigations will help. After all we need the line with or without these roller-coaster ramps.
|
|
|
Post by erict on May 16, 2009 19:45:31 GMT -8
People seem excited about the Crenshaw Station, studying it when they drive by. It's a unique station in the sense that it's at-grade and in a large open area. There is no other light-rail station (including Expo) in LA similar to it I believe. You can see the platforms when driving along the two-lane Exposition Blvd. The platforms are also set back from Crenshaw with the future Crenshaw Line in mind. It will make a good connection to the Crenshaw community and to the south of it if the Crenshaw Line is built. So, I'm excited to see the line open to Crenshaw. Sounds very interesting to me, I want to see what it is going to look like....
|
|
|
Post by darrell on May 16, 2009 22:23:52 GMT -8
Sounds very interesting to me, I want to see what it is going to look like.... Here's a view of the east-bound Crenshaw station foundation forms on 5/12/09. The apartment building is on the south-west corner of Exposition and Victoria, one block west of Crenshaw. The concrete in the foreground is the curb to contain the ballast. (Wish I'd pointed my camera more toward Crenshaw; oh well, next time.) Compare with this Expo Authority simulation of this platform:
|
|
|
Post by masonite on May 17, 2009 10:08:39 GMT -8
The best case for opening to Crenshaw seems to be late 2010, say December 31, 2010. I was told that there are serious construction and operation conflicts in opening the line in segments; so, they will have to work that out. If that is the case this is a huge blow to the MTA. The whole line was supposed to open in 2010. This means the line would essentially be at least a year behind schedule, not to mention it is over budget badly. The Construction Committee is saying it is about 32 weeks behind schedule with many of the problems in the Crenshaw to Culver City segment. This would have to be false. I find it somewhat ironic that the East LA Gold Line with its underground section and stations has gone much smoother than the supposedly easy to build at grade Expo Line. The argument for at grade light rail everywhere is really losing its luster. If it isn't cheap and easy to build, what is the benefit? It certainly doesn't have long term ridership capability or is able to serve our most needed corridors. We'll see when they can actually open this line.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 17, 2009 10:55:54 GMT -8
According to the latest project-status presentation, completion is at 37% and delay is 44 weeks (10 months). It will still be many times cheaper at the end than if they had to build a full subway. Nowadays you are looking at $600 million per mile for a subway; so, it would have been $4.5 billion, five times the current cost of $0.9 billion. It would take longer too.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 17, 2009 17:15:15 GMT -8
The best case for opening to Crenshaw seems to be late 2010, say December 31, 2010. I was told that there are serious construction and operation conflicts in opening the line in segments; so, they will have to work that out. If that is the case this is a huge blow to the MTA. The whole line was supposed to open in 2010. This means the line would essentially be at least a year behind schedule, not to mention it is over budget badly. The Construction Committee is saying it is about 32 weeks behind schedule with many of the problems in the Crenshaw to Culver City segment. This would have to be false. The latest update shows a 44-week delay. It's been getting longer every month. And why would that have to be false? There are no official plans to open the line in segments that I'm aware of. In fact, according to Gokhan they have serious concerns about doing that. The current official plan is to open the line in its entirety.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on May 17, 2009 18:37:27 GMT -8
I find it somewhat ironic that the East LA Gold Line with its underground section and stations has gone much smoother than the supposedly easy to build at grade Expo Line. The Eastside FEIS/FEIR was certified by the MTA Board at its Febuary 28, 2002 meeting. In contrast, Expo's FEIS/FEIR wasn't certified until nearly 4 years later, December 15, 2005. Considering that except for the tunnel and one new bridge the Eastside is all embedded track in street medians, it had no CPUC challenges, and as far as I know had no DWP delays, Expo isn't that much of a laggard. (For a hilarious acronym, the L.A. Bureau of Engineering referred to it as the "Gold Line Eastside Extension Project (GLEEP)".)
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on May 17, 2009 19:50:27 GMT -8
I think that, considering the contractor/materials cost overruns, the Expo Line has been built in a rather hostile environment...but we all still have the right to be disappointed.
In the long run, no one will really give a rip if the now-pressured contractors get the whole line built to Culver City in one big MOS in 2011 (might as well, at this point), but we all have the right to be disappointed.
...and we should expect more from the Authority, despite being realistic about the unexpected delays that always occur with respect to utility line displacement.
The Authority owes us an explanation--as do the contractors--and we need to learn, as taxpayers, which delays are appropriate and unavoidable, and which delays are inappropriate and should have been foreseen.
|
|