|
Post by darrell on May 13, 2009 12:37:13 GMT -8
Here's a sketch of the Santa Monica terminus station plaza at 4th and Colorado, from Monday's community workshop and last night's city council meeting presentation on the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) update.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 13, 2009 13:34:47 GMT -8
I can hardly make anything out of that picture, except for the seagulls and people. Where is the platform? Where is the street? Is the platform continuously connected to the sidewalk via ramping grounds?
|
|
|
Post by darrell on May 13, 2009 15:49:19 GMT -8
It's looking from about the corner of 4th and Colorado east toward the station platforms. Monday evening consultant Bob Odermatt described the ground sloping down 8 feet along Colorado and 10 feet along 4th. This concept sketch was about how that sloping plaza could look, as the entry into downtown Santa Monica. The image below is looking the other way, from a station platform toward 4th Street, which is angled relative to the platform. ( You think this looks bad, you should see my original photo off the screen! Image replaced with a much better one from a LUCE presentation.)
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Dec 13, 2009 9:27:45 GMT -8
From Friends 4 Expo: Expo Line phase 2 Final EIR ________________________
This week begins the home stretch for the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Expo Line phase 2, the rest of the way from Culver City to Santa Monica that opens about 2015.
We expect the FEIR to be released December 15, and the Expo Authority board to adopt it on February 4, 2010 (postponed from January 14). Watch for it at buildexpo.org/phase2_overview.php . We’ll email our comments after we review it. From the extensive environmental process to date we:
1. Support the Expo Authority’s preferred alignment along the railroad right-of-way in Los Angeles and Colorado Ave. in Santa Monica. It has greater ridership, is 4-6 minutes faster, has less than 2/3 the cost, and has fewer environmental impacts than the Venice-Sepulveda alternative.
2. Support consistent application of the Metro Grade Crossing Policy. The environmental study found no significant traffic, noise, or safety impacts at the crossings proposed to be at-grade. Note also that of the many US light rail lines opened after 1980, not one has built a long, deep tunnel below an existing railroad right-of-way as a few around Cheviot Hills are calling for.
3. Seek LA City approval of slightly narrower lanes on Overland and Westwood to support priorities of pedestrians and bicycles, not just cars, and preserve existing parkways and mature street trees.
4. Support the station at Westwood Blvd. (with the greatest projected boardings in phase 2) but with a park/greenway, not a parking lot. We also recommend preferential parking in the adjacent neighborhood upon opening, and would minimize the height of soundwalls to be less visually divisive.
________________________
See the NEWS page at friends4expo.org for more, including many phase 1 construction photos.
If you'd like to be added (or removed), please email mail@friends4expo.org.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Dec 15, 2009 12:10:29 GMT -8
I just talked to Gaby at Expo: the phase 2 Final EIR is not quite ready, and won't be released today. At this point she thinks it will probably be on Friday, but she'll know more by tomorrow morning.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Dec 17, 2009 16:45:00 GMT -8
I just heard from Gaby at Expo that the phase 2 Final EIR will be posted at noon tomorrow (Friday, 12/18). There will also be a CD - that includes a huge file all of the comments cross-indexed - available for $5.30.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 17, 2009 17:50:36 GMT -8
I just heard from Gaby at Expo that the phase 2 Final EIR will be posted at noon tomorrow (Friday, 12/18). There will also be a CD - that includes a huge file all of the comments cross-indexed - available for $5.30. Wow, that's expensive! Expo sure is going bankrupt if they've resorted to selling the FEIR. LOL
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Dec 17, 2009 22:21:19 GMT -8
Gotta pay for all the legal fees...
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 18, 2009 12:05:39 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 18, 2009 13:11:48 GMT -8
Glancing over the FEIR, it's identical to the DEIR with strikethroughs for deleted words and sentences and double-underline for new words and sentences.
The new design options are:
Sepulveda Grade Separation—Grade separates Sepulveda Boulevard, with a bridge structure and an aerial Expo/Sepulveda Station, subject to the provision of additional funding by others. Under this grade separated design option, the LRT alignment would ascend starting west of Military Avenue to a bridge structure over Sepulveda Boulevard and an aerial station platform between Sepulveda Boulevard and the I-405 Freeway. Expo/Westwood Station No Parking—Eliminates the 170 surface parking spaces that were dedicated to transit patrons at the Expo/Westwood Station. As such, parking access from Overland Avenue, Selby Avenue, and Exposition Boulevard would be eliminated. To address community concerns regarding the loss of on-street parking along Westwood Boulevard, 20 parking spaces would be dedicated to neighborhood residents east of Westwood Boulevard and north of the LRT line. Maintenance Facility Buffer—Provides an alternative layout for the Maintenance Facility that would occupy only a portion of the Verizon site, with an extension of the facility into the existing Santa Monica College parking lot to the west. Utilization of the adjacent parking lot on the west side of the Verizon site would create an approximate 100- to 110- foot buffer between the Maintenance Facility and the residential area on the south side of Exposition Boulevard. Colorado Avenue Parking Retention—Preserves on-street parking along Colorado Avenue by reducing the width of the LRT trackway and sidewalks along selected portions of Colorado Avenue. Further, the Overhead Contact System (OCS) poles would be located within the sidewalks on either side of the street (versus in the center of the tracks), requiring the contact wires to span the entire street overhead. CPUC approval would be required for the reduction in track spacing. Colorado/4th Parallel Platform and South Side Parking—Places Colorado/4th Street Station parallel to 4th Street and modifies the track geometry leading to the station between the terminus and approximately 11th Street. With this track reconfiguration, the on-street parking would be retained on the south side of Colorado Avenue rather than the north side, between 5th Street and Lincoln Boulevard.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Dec 18, 2009 13:35:49 GMT -8
Here's a way to look at the responses to comments in the DEIR (but only if you have a fast Internet connection!): Click on Index Tables for Comments and Responses. That opens an 8MB PDF. In that PDF, click on a link by one of the comments, like Friends 4 Expo Transit. That opens the main 41MB PDF of comments and responses. Save both files on your machine. Then you can open the Index and link to responses locally.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 18, 2009 14:03:59 GMT -8
Here's a way to look at the responses to comments in the DEIR (but only if you have a fast Internet connection!): Click on Index Tables for Comments and Responses. That opens an 8MB PDF. In that PDF, click on a link by one of the comments, like Friends 4 Expo Transit. That opens the main 41MB PDF of comments and responses. Save both files on your machine. Then you can open the Index and link to responses locally. Who has dial-up nowadays? LOL Actually you need to download all the files under the following link to be able to view all the comments: buildexpo.org/phase2/Phase%202%20FEIR%20Documents/Volume%20II/
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 18, 2009 14:11:49 GMT -8
And there are two more TBRs here for the ridership analysis, which are not linked at the Expo Phase 2 page: Link
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Dec 19, 2009 10:11:10 GMT -8
And there are two more TBRs here for the ridership analysis, which are not linked at the Expo Phase 2 page: LinkOne thing that stands out is that they will run the 5 minute headways at peak times in the afternoon, which they define as 3:00-5:30 p.m. I know there are a lot of schools along the line, but I think it needs to go to at least 6:30. A lot of people get off work at 5:30 or 6:00, certainly more than those who get off at 3:00. The freeway rushhour (although it is really jammed much of the day) is more like 4:00 - 7:00, so I find this one a bit odd.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Dec 19, 2009 11:30:33 GMT -8
At this point, I would prefer to see Sepulveda Station above-grade, and Westwood Station at-grade without the parking. I know there is disagreement on these issues, and even I have straddled the fence on them.
In my mind, too much parking at Westwood Station could impact the neighborhood by increasing traffic (people coming in cars, looking for parking). Better to keep it as a bus transfer station. The bike path and park are better elements for the neighborhood. And at-grade is better here, as Gokhan has noted, because of the cost and visual impacts of aerial or trench structures.
Sepulveda Station, on the other hand, is more suited to aerial configuration with park-and-ride. It is farther from residences, so the visual impact is minimized. And, its location between a large boulevard and a freeway makes it easier for people to get to the station by car.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 19, 2009 12:01:03 GMT -8
At this point, I would prefer to see Sepulveda Station above-grade, and Westwood Station at-grade without the parking. I know there is disagreement on these issues, and even I have straddled the fence on them. In my mind, too much parking at Westwood Station could impact the neighborhood by increasing traffic (people coming in cars, looking for parking). Better to keep it as a bus transfer station. The bike path and park are better elements for the neighborhood. And at-grade is better here, as Gokhan has noted, because of the cost and visual impacts of aerial or trench structures. Sepulveda Station, on the other hand, is more suited to aerial configuration with park-and-ride. It is farther from residences, so the visual impact is minimized. And, its location between a large boulevard and a freeway makes it easier for people to get to the station by car. Sepulveda grade separation is contingent upon two things: (1) Casden Properties finalizing their EIR on the cement-plant development and having it certified in a timely manner before the building of Phase 2 starts and (2) after their EIR is certified, Casden Properties signing an agreement to pay $13 million to Expo so that they could build a driveway across Exposition, requiring an aerial station above it. Again, all this has to be done in a timely manner, before the Expo Authority submits their final design and grade-crossing applications to CPUC.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Dec 19, 2009 16:23:31 GMT -8
And there are two more TBRs here for the ridership analysis, which are not linked at the Expo Phase 2 page: LinkOne thing that stands out is that they will run the 5 minute headways at peak times in the afternoon, which they define as 3:00-5:30 p.m. I know there are a lot of schools along the line, but I think it needs to go to at least 6:30. A lot of people get off work at 5:30 or 6:00, certainly more than those who get off at 3:00. The freeway rushhour (although it is really jammed much of the day) is more like 4:00 - 7:00, so I find this one a bit odd. You're reading too much into those 2030 service level estimates. A lot can happen between now and then. Those are only estimates not an operations final decision. They've already changed the 2030 blue line headway estimates from those shown in the TBR's. They still show the half the blue line trains turning at Willow in 2030, when Metro has already said that they plan to run all trains to Long Beach by 2015(?).
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Dec 19, 2009 17:49:48 GMT -8
I would guess the "3:00-5:30 PM" refers to when the trains begin their trip. Those trains are going to take nearly an hour to get to the other end of the line, so their should be good coverage for rush hour.
And anyway, if demand is high enough to warrant a longer rush-hour schedule, Metro will add trains over a longer rush-hour.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Dec 19, 2009 19:11:43 GMT -8
They don't describe every interval on the timetable for estimates of service 20 years away. Besides they do say 5 minute headways from 3:00-6:30 in the operating plan and assumptions TBR.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Dec 20, 2009 0:36:09 GMT -8
"Colorado Avenue Parking Retention—Preserves on-street parking along Colorado Avenue by reducing the width of the LRT trackway and sidewalks along selected portions of Colorado Avenue. Further, the Overhead Contact System (OCS) poles would be located within the sidewalks on either side of the street"
Yuck! I thought we had stopped shrinking sidewalks for the sake of cars. And putting the poles on the sidewalk will give pedestrians even less space. We should oppose this option.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 21, 2009 13:31:32 GMT -8
"Colorado Avenue Parking Retention—Preserves on-street parking along Colorado Avenue by reducing the width of the LRT trackway and sidewalks along selected portions of Colorado Avenue. Further, the Overhead Contact System (OCS) poles would be located within the sidewalks on either side of the street" Yuck! I thought we had stopped shrinking sidewalks for the sake of cars. And putting the poles on the sidewalk will give pedestrians even less space. We should oppose this option. Agreed. When too many people have a voice on a project, a worse design comes as the outcome at the end. This is what has been happening with Santa Monica. They are too involved with the design. This is one of the things they got wrong. Narrow sidewalks with catenary poles in the middle of them is a pedestrian nightmare. Not to mention dangers to the pedestrians created by not providing a squeeze space between two simultaneously passing trains.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 21, 2009 14:10:51 GMT -8
I've read Chapter 2 -- Alternatives. Phase 2 will be very beautiful, and it's so exciting that it's being realized. Here is what I thought to be interesting:
Parking near Bagley is removed -- a very good thing -- as this area is too dense with very high residential parking demand, a very narrow Exposition Boulevard, and necessity for a nice bike and pedestrian path through the right-of-way.
There will be a storage and maintenance track west of Palms/National.
Retaining walls and barriers will be provided in the Palms area.
Palms Park pedestrian bridge will remain unchanged.
Barriers will be provided on both sides of the tracks throughout the line (perhaps except for the Colorado section).
Overland and Westwood will both widened 4 ft.
At the bus stops on Westwood, sidewalks will be 11-ft-wide.
The Westwood bus stops will be far-side stop, buses stopping after crossing the tracks in either direction.
At Westwood a new signal will be installed at the crossing in addition to the gates, and it will be tied to the Ashby signal.
Pico/Sawtelle structure will be the most complicated structure of Phase 2. Pico Blvd and nearby streets will see extensive construction impacts as the street is completely regraded to a different elevation.
There will be eight traction power substations, 1,500 kW each, with the total power of 12,000 kW (16,000 HP). This is equivalent to three large locomotive engines or about 100 automobile engines. Note that this is for trains in both directions. So, for the equivalent of 100 cars, the system will carry 50,000 passengers. In addition it's all electric; so, it's more efficient and perfectly clean. The people (like USC professor Jim Moore and the Westside NIMBYs) who bash light-rail and advocate for cars instead don't realize that light-rail is 1,000 times more fuel-efficient than driving.
Trip times and average speeds. In my opinion they can shave off three to five minutes from these times:
Expo ROW/Colorado: 19.5 min 20.3 MPH Expo ROW/Olympic: 18.2 min 21.8 MPH
Venice/Sepulveda/Colorado: 23.4 min 19.2 MPH Venice/Sepulveda/Olympic: 22.1 min 20.4 MPH
The Expo and Blue Lines will share the same trains as needed.
Bus-service headway changes:
Metro 714: 15 --> 10 min Metro 220: 40 --> 30 min SM Super 12: add southbound and offpeak operations SM 14: 12 --> 10 min SM Crosstown: add the opposite direction
New vehicles:
47 LRVs 1 Metro bus 2 CC buses 16 SM buses
Ridership (Phase 2 alone):
36,412 boardings per day
Station boardings:
Palms/National: 1,856 Westwood: 5,213 Sepulveda: 5,097 Bundy: 2,811 26th: 2,116 17th: 3,093 4th: 2,906
I personally think that Palms/National ridership is significantly underestimated, probably because the ridership estimates are based on present ridership and this area of Palms is served poorly by public transit at the present.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Dec 21, 2009 14:58:59 GMT -8
20 MPH average speed sounds good for at-grade rail. Isn't the average speed of the average New York Subway line around 16-20MPH, and it's entirely grade separated? I've heard that the average speed of the Boston subway is 20 MPH.
Gokhan, is it more expensive to maintain an underground line versus an at-grade one?
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Dec 21, 2009 15:08:11 GMT -8
I agree about the concerns of the Expo Line west of Lincoln blvd and now the apparent narrowing of sidewalks in order to maintain street parking. The Expo Line should have been a subway west of Lincoln with a terminus directly under the 3rd street promenade at Colorado (i.e. more "pedestrian friendly" than a 2 block walk to 4th/5th and Colorado). This new terminus will remind me of the problems Memorial Park station has in attracting riders who are destined for Colorado blvd in Pasadena, outside of the Rose Parade event. Now, we're getting a trolley system after the line goes west of Lincoln...I can already hear the speed complaints like Metro received for the Gold Line eastside extension along the 3rd street running portion...
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Dec 21, 2009 15:46:29 GMT -8
The last mile of the Expo Line along the Colorado median from 17th to 5th Street will probably take 3 minutes, worst case 4. A subway west of Lincoln would cut, what, one minute?
The location of the terminus station is actually a pretty good compromise between downtown destinations. You have the Promenade to the north, Santa Monica Place right across the street, City Hall and the Civic Center just south, and the Pier three blocks west. Moving it closer to one of those would make others farther away.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 21, 2009 15:47:06 GMT -8
20 MPH average speed sounds good for at-grade rail. Isn't the average speed of the average New York Subway line around 16-20MPH, and it's entirely grade separated? I've heard that the average speed of the Boston subway is 20 MPH. Gokhan, is it more expensive to maintain an underground line versus an at-grade one? The Expo Phase 2 is effectively grade-separated all the way from Gramercy Pl in Los Angeles to 17th St in Santa Monica. This is because the trains don't slow down at the crossing gates and the nominal speed is 55 MPH. There would be virtually no speed difference in this segment in comparison to a full subway. I don't know what is cheaper to maintain but I would think it would be at-grade. It's not easy to work in the tunnels and I think at-grade alignments have more crossovers, allowing shorter sections of rail to be closed for maintenance. Others might know more about maintenance.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 21, 2009 16:10:01 GMT -8
I agree about the concerns of the Expo Line west of Lincoln blvd and now the apparent narrowing of sidewalks in order to maintain street parking. The Expo Line should have been a subway west of Lincoln with a terminus directly under the 3rd street promenade at Colorado (i.e. more "pedestrian friendly" than a 2 block walk to 4th/5th and Colorado). This new terminus will remind me of the problems Memorial Park station has in attracting riders who are destined for Colorado blvd in Pasadena, outside of the Rose Parade event. Now, we're getting a trolley system after the line goes west of Lincoln...I can already hear the speed complaints like Metro received for the Gold Line eastside extension along the 3rd street running portion... It was the community's almost unanimous consensus to have the Expo Line on Colorado. If Santa Monica agrees for signal priority for the trains, there should not be more than a minute of delay because of running in the median of Colorado. I agree that with no signal priority, it will be too slow in this one-mile-long section, making many riders frustrated. They will not be happy to spend 5 minutes in the last mile, after traversing the entire Westside in 5 minutes. Everybody hates red lights! One definite advantage of the Colorado alignment is that people will see the trains and they know that they're there, unlike the Downtown Pasadena Station, where the light-rail line is hidden from the casual folks.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Dec 21, 2009 20:52:15 GMT -8
Gokahn, if the Expo Line can do 55 between Gamercy and 17th, it won't have to slow down at Dorsey HS?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 21, 2009 21:06:49 GMT -8
Gokahn, if the Expo Line can do 55 between Gamercy and 17th, it won't have to slow down at Dorsey HS? Remember, there will be a pedestrian bridge with the crossing closed or a station, where the trains must naturally stop, at Farmdale. The only exception is Crenshaw, where there are no gates because it's designed for a possible rail - rail crossing. Also, of course, where there are curves, speed limit is less than 55 MPH, usually 45 MPH, given the gentle nature of curves along the alignment, except near the Santa Monica Freeway, where there are sharp curves with 25 MPH speed limit. These sharp curves are a result of the right-of-way realignment near Motor during the freeway construction.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Dec 21, 2009 21:48:49 GMT -8
Gokhan, do you have any documents on some of the pro/cons of at-grade and grade-separated rail?
I've always looked as it as an issue of balancing aesthetics, speed, accessibility, and other factors. I really like at-grade stations like Mission Station on the Gold Line, but I also like the speed of the Red Line or the Green Line, yet the Green Line is really inaccessible and the Red Line is expensive.
It always seemed like there are pros and cons to every situation. At-grade rail has an easier time of blending in. Grade separated rail is more likely to be opposed due to fear that it may blight a community, I think.
Where do you fall on these issues, especially as it relates to Expo?
|
|