Extension to Whittier study corridor

[tonyw79sfv]

www.metro.net/news_info/press/metro_190.htm

It's been an exciting month as Metro has had meetings for the Westside, Crenshaw, and Regional Connector studies. Now they are looking for input to take the Eastside Gold Line farther, to Whittier!

[Mac]

Dang it, u beat to posting this! Anyways heres the skinny:

Public Invited to Participate in Metro Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Study Meetings in November

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) will be conducting four meetings in November to review different alternatives for improving mobility in an east-west corridor stretching from East Los Angeles to Whittier.

Metro is looking beyond the 2009 completion of the extension of the Metro Gold Line from downtown to East Los Angeles. This Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 study area is comprised of the cities of Montebello, Pico Rivera, Monterey Park, Industry, Downey, Whittier, Commerce, Rosemead, South El Monte, South San Gabriel, Santa Fe Springs, Bell, as well as areas of Los Angeles County.

Transit alternatives include bus and Light Rail Transit (LRT) options, as part of an Alternatives Analysis (AA) to study possible routes and configurations for further environmental review. The public will have the opportunity to review the proposed study goals and objectives, speak with Metro staff, view study displays and maps and submit written or verbal comments.

The community meetings are as follow:

Thursday, November 8
6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Palm Park
5703 Palm Avenue
Whittier

Saturday, November 10
9 a.m. to 12 p.m.
Senior Center at City Park
115 South Taylor Avenue
Montebello

Wednesday, November 14
6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Potrero Heights Elementary School
8026 East Hill Drive
Rosemead

Thursday, November 15
6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
North Park Middle School/Cafeteria
4450 Durfee Avenue
Pico Rivera

Metro’s scoping meetings are the first step in the environmental study process to inform the community about the project early in the decision-making process and to seek their input on the Alternatives Analysis, the project purposes and need for the transit improvements in the corridor, the transit alternatives modes, the alignments to be considered, and the types of impacts to be evaluated.

All the facilities for the public meetings are accessible to persons with disabilities. Any individual who requires special assistance, such as a sign language interpreter and/or to participate in any of the scoping meetings should contact David Monks, Metro Community Relations Manager at 213 922-7456 or [e-mail]. Copies of scoping materials will be available at the meetings and are also available on Metro’s website at www.metro.net/eastsidephase2

Those unable to attend the meetings may also submit their input by phone, fax, mail, or e-mail by contacting: Kimberly Yu, Project Manager, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), Mail Stop 99-22-02, One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90012, Phone: [phone], e-mail: [e-mail] Written comments may be submitted at the meeting or no later than November 30, 2007.

Metro-190 (General)

EDITOR’S NOTE: Metro is the official name of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority as adopted by the Metro Board of Directors in December 2004. To be consistent, we ask that “Metro” be used when referring to this agency. We ask for your cooperation in updating your style guides. If you need to update your files with the current Metro logo, please call Metro Media Relations at [phone].

---------------------------------------------------

LOL, read that editors note. I think "MTA" is still gonna be used for many years! And I still don't know why its called "Metro". A metro is supposed to be a subway, or a rapid rail transit. So when they say, "Metro Bus" they are basically saying Rapid rail transit bus, or subway bus...

And I still like the name, "MTA: Might Take Awhile" < credits to metroman

[Mac]

BTW, it seems as though as theres been some inactivity at this forum.... where is everyone..

[kenalpern]

Agreed...perhaps there are too many meetings for us to attend this month!

Anyhow, the only thing I know for certain is that I'm not a fan of the 60 freeway median being used as an alignment because of the problems of median stations already existing on the Green and Pasaadena Gold Lines. Furthermore, it fosters virtually no transit-oriented development. Which alignments do you guys all recommend?

[wad]

Whittier Boulevard would be too narrow to handle a train. It would take three lanes away from what is now a 6-lane street, with one lane used for parking.

Instead, Metro's best chance might be to take over what's being used now for the Metrolink Riverside line and take that over through North Whittier, then extend it to Uptown Whittier and the L.A. County Line.

The train would go south on Atlantic, and continue to the Commerce Center (the strip mall on Whittier and the hub of the well-used Commerce free bus system), then run through there and take over the right of way.

[kenalpern]

Here's a bonehead idea: what do you think of a Santa Fe Springs terminus to bring more LRT to the southeast portion of the county...and maaaaaaybe start thinking of future lines that involve a junction of the Eastside Gold Line and the Green Line at the Norwalk Metrolink station?

[Tony Fernandez]

Seconded, I already sent an email to Metro about extending it down Beverly to Garfield down the ROW and ending at that 6-way intersection. (Whittier, Washington, Pickering, La Cuarta, Santa Fe Springs)

[hooligan]

phattonez said:

Seconded, I already sent an email to Metro about extending it down Beverly to Garfield down the ROW and ending at that 6-way intersection. (Whittier, Washington, Pickering, La Cuarta, Santa Fe Springs)

I too envisioned the terminus above the fivepoint in whittier. Utilizing the old railbridge(no longer there) ) and converting it into a station. But unfortunatley the old railway that goes from there to the san gabriel river to beverly Blvd is being converted into a bike and jogging trail. the bridge was recently dismantled Shame really would have been cool to have a station end there.

the proposed route along the freeway would be like the greenline loud. I know I ride that line everyday to work. it stinks.
but its really fast. so that an advantage

I personally like the washington blvd alignment(the street is wide enough) It ends near the Five point in Whittier, near a hospital. it goes through the center of Pico Rivera(i live near there) it would go right through the town center they built. ;D. It would take you to the commerce casino and citadel The only problem with it is that it misses a good chunk of montebello and it stays on washington then turns on atlantic. wouldn't it be easier if it went on on washington then telegraph(its wide enough) then up Atlantic to the existing terminus.

I also like the Whittier blvd alignment more ridership and it hits a higher population of transit riders. But it looks like it would take a longer time and whittier blvd is too narrow between Montebello Blvd and the Rio Hondo river wash. Unless the city decided to close that street and make it like a third street promenade with a train going in between it.

Im for it ending in Whittier if you havent guessed. ;D

[kenalpern]

Just a reminder that the first meeting is tonight!!!

www.metro.net/news_info/press/metro_190.htm

[kenalpern]

I had to leave early, but there was some preliminary favoring of the line amongst the crowd (if the earliest speakers are any suggestions). I suspect there might need to be some subway or elevated portions if the Whittier alignment is chosen, but that's where the action appears to be.

I recommended it NOT go along the 60 freeway, because median stations and alignments have their problems for those who use it and it's terrible for TOD creation; I suggested converting the El Monte Busway (northern portion of the map) to LRT or HRT if capacity issues are affecting that transit line.

I recommended a fairly straight alignment from Beverly/Atlantic station down Beverly to Whittier, perhaps with a jog on Garfield and maybe with some underground or elevated segments if needed.

...and the guy after me who works as a school supervisor in Santa Fe Springs recommended the line proceed beyond Whittier to Santa Fe Springs.

Overall, this appears to be a potentially great project!

[cschaefer]

Hi all!
I am new to this forum, but want to be a part of this important discussion. I have been a Whittier resident my whole life and the impact of traffic and the lack of public transit options in Whittier has become a huge problem. I remember when an initial EIR was drafted by MTA about 20 years ago which identified Whittier as the terminus for a heavy rail (i.e. subway) line. As we all know, this project tanked. With the current discussion underway, I am not confident that the City Councils of Whittier, Pico Rivera, and Montebello (the cities where the Gold Line eastside extension would go through) know how important this project is, as evidenced by the lack of Council members at the Whittier scoping meeting. My request to you is to help me get the word out by writing to these Council members and other local representatives and make sure that this is a priority for them. Also, writing letters to the editor (Daily News, LA Times, etc...) would get the word out and make sure that this project is followed through to construction. This project is too important to let die off again.
Thanks for your time.

[cschaefer]

Howdy,
I failed to ask this on my previous posting, but did anybody attend the Scoping meetings that were held in Montebello, Pico Rivera, or Rosemead? I was curious to hear what went on at those meetings.
Thanks
Chris

[antonio]

Not to put a damper on the discussions because I think any expansion of rail in our region is great but I want to suggest something that I'm sure the MTA isn't thinking about but is a very important and valid point. Boyle Heights and East LA are such transit dependent and vibrant parts of the city that they need not only a slow mostly above ground line that while modern is not really efficient (17 minutes to go 6 miles) but also a heavy rail subway under Whittier. It is this line that should continue down Whittier to the city of Whittier and then Santa Fe Springs, giving people along the whole corridor fast and modern access not only to downtown but also the Westside to truly create the Wilshire Whittier corridor while the current Eastside extension should go to the Montebello Town center and then South El Monte as far as the 605 to parallel the busy 60 (but certainly not run in the median). It would be mostly grade separated to ensure speed and there are patches of unused land north of the freeway that could certainly support TODs. Sure, between Indiana and downtown the two lines will run parallel but if any area needs duplicating parallel service its Boyle Heights not SM with Expo and Purple. Just something to think about before we bring a slower at-grade light rail to Whitter/SFS when in 20 years we'll see its jammed and slow and we should have built heavy rail in the first place.

[Mac]

Ya, agreed, I do prefer a grade-separated line, whether it is a light rail or a heavy rail. Unfortunately, we don't have the finances to build anything fully grade separated.

[roadtrainer]

;DGuys and Gals: I am in favor of the rail line following the "60" freeway. It would run street level on Pomona Blvd. until it got along side 0f the "60"and there it should run elevated with one station at Garfield and then go elevated until it gets going over the pass. It would run along side of the "60"freeway and have a stop for Paramount Blvd., The Montebello Shopping Center, Rosemead Blvd., and curve southeast to the "605" bridge that crosses into Whitter or it could go South to meet the Metrolink/Santa Fe ROW going to Santa Fe Springs. You guys got to remember that Whittier is full of s--t--oh !! I mean NIMBY"S--sorry!! And my Idea for a rail line might be the cheapest because it runs on the freeway ROW and Those Neanderthal NIMBY"S ::)can't say anything about the State Owned ROWS!
Sincerely The Roadtrainer

[kenalpern]

If Whittier is both narrow and busy, I could easily see another subway portion of the Eastside LRT extended below Whittier Blvd. to the City of Whittier. I'm not certain that we'll see anything near the 60 freeway anytime soon...but at least this is being explored.

Did anyone go to the other meetings? For those of you unable to attend those meetings, did you go to the website and send them your recommendations?

[whitmanlam]

I attended the Thursday meeting in Pico Rivera, very good turnout that night, we had almost 100 attendees. Most were in favor of some type of alignment going to Whittier, as that is a hard to reach destination by bus.
There were only 2 opponents. One was a homeowner who lives along Washington Blvd. and was afraid the Goldline would exacerbate the soil erosion along the Rio Hondo bridge. The other was a MTA employee who thought transit funds are being wasted. They were the minority... as most people are really stoked about light rail in their neighborhood.... just not near their schools.

For more info, you can visit:
metro.net/eastsidephase2

An 60 FWY alignment will be the path of least resistance, as the area is already a freeway. Anything along Atlantic Blvd. will have to be subway, then Washington or Whittier, some segments have ROW or a wide median, most places don't.
Another possibility is a line going all the way south to Commerce Casino then East to Whittier...
www.metro.net/projects_programs/eastside_phase2/study%20area%20map.pdf

[JerardWright]

Personally, the 60 freeway corridor is a path of least resistance but also one of least ridership and the TOD developments next to the freeway will have to combat against the ashtma, CO2 and other wonderful air particles living next to a freeway provides not to mention the environmental clearences to even start building those homes. It may be the path of least resistence on the surface but there's a lot more to it.

In my letter I suggested extending the under construction Boyle Heights subway in both directions. One to connect to the Downtown Connector project to the West and to the East the line will follow the many studied Eastside Red Line extensions which would go under Lorena or Indiana turn on Whittier Blvd and continue under Whittier Blvd. Follow the subway until meeting up with a railroad ROW or area that has a favorable zoning to bring the trains out of the ground and continuing to at least the 605 or Norwalk Blvd. What brought that on was that the study area map included the under construction tunnel until at least the LA River.

The only main difference between heavy rail and light rail are the amount of grade separations. If this portion is fully grade separated but uses LRV's, that's heavy rail like the Green Line.

[Justin Walker]

The Study Area shown on the map is a very large area and it's a shame that no one alignment seems to be able to serve the whole area well.

A line through Whittier and Santa Fe Springs to a future Norwalk Green Line / Gold Line / Metrolink / High-Speed Rail Transportation Center sure seems to make the most sense, in terms on connectivity, however.

[kenalpern]

Hear, hear, Justin! It would be interesting, indeed, if this could go as far as Santa Fe Springs.

[roadtrainer]

Mr. Walker wrote: A line through Whittier and Santa Fe Springs to a future Norwalk Green Line / Gold Line / Metrolink / High-Speed Rail Transportation Center sure seems to make the most sense, in terms on connectivity, however.

;D Well the idea of hooking them all up is a good one but does it make sense for a rail line to go along the "60"and curve south at the "605" and go south to Slauson and take the curve on the Old Southern Pacific ROW and curve again at Firestone to meet the Imperial Hwy.; Amtrak; Metrolink; And Possible Metro Green Line Station?
We really shouldn't dream up elaborate routes when the whole idea is to get to Downtown in a short amount of time! Why take a train that gets you to downtown an hour after you get there by your own car?
A few years ago when the High Speed Rail Line was looking at the Firestone Blvd. line as a high speed corridor. It had the train in a trench with bridges over the ROW. If I remember right, the Pomona Freeway was being looked at for a Heavy Rail or Light Rail line going to Pomona. I think the only sell for a rail line along the "605"is from the Gold Line to PCH, Imagine the Gold Line connects to the El Monte Station, and Metrolink then south to the East L.A. Extension. (the 60) and then south to the Merto Green Line(the 105) and a little further down the Whatever transportation line near the "91" {is it Mag-Lev or bus way or Light Rail} and further south to the University in long Beach. Sincerely The Roadtrainer

[kenalpern]

With all due respect, Roadtrainer, I think the idea is to have this line go where the pedestrian/transit traffic is, which is on or near Whittier Blvd. (the Eastside equivalent of Wilshire Blvd.). Yes, there will be grade separation and potential underground routings, but this really is where it needs to go to reach the cities of Whittier and Santa Fe Springs.

As for something on the 60 freeway, I'm not terribly bullish on that idea...but hey, I don't live around there so I realize my opinion might be a truly lousy one.

Any locals want to help me/us out, here?

[wad]

kenalpern said:

As for something on the 60 freeway, I'm not terribly bullish on that idea...but hey, I don't live around there so I realize my opinion might be a truly lousy one.

Any locals want to help me/us out, here?

I don't live there, but I have experience with transportation corridors in this great county of ours.

Here's the deal.

The negatives outweigh the positives with a 60 freeway alignment. There is little to no ridership generation between East L.A. College and Puente Hills Mall, with the exception of Montebello Town center. There's a large parkland area, and light industry, but the La Puente and Hacienda Heights areas may take to the line.

The line would rely quite heavily on the two malls to bolster ridership. It would require these malls to double as park & ride lots (PHM does already for Foothill commuter buses). Otherwise, the trip generation is not going to be heavy.

Whittier Boulevard, on the other hand, is a trunk corridor and has been a regional arterial for decades. The ridership generation potential is great here.

[whitmanlam]

I think a GoldLine Extension shouldn't run entirely on the 60 FWY. The Montebello Town Center has alot of parking that can be used to build a TOD residential development. From there the Gold Line can run East to Rosemead @ the 60 FWY and then turn South and run along Rosemead Blvd to Whittier Blvd.
That won't be too expensive to build because Rosemead is already a wide corridor with some median strip in the middle.

[roadtrainer]

Mr. Whitmanlam: You made a good point on the possible routing down Rosemead Blvd. But will the beatuiful city of Pico Rivera like the idea of this possible route? and Good Doctor Alpern your advise has always been pretty good. It is a shame that you don't get to work with Metro or on thier committees that study the possible corridors. Sincerely The Roadtrainer

[kenalpern]

Thanks for the very kind words, roadtrainer...and I do have the privilege of working with Metro on such groups as the Green Line Interagency Task Force to bring the Green Line to LAX.

Jerard Wright, Bart Reed and myself are familiar faces at other projects such as Expo, Crenshaw, Downtown Connector, Wilshire Subway and now Eastside LRT, and Metro has been graciously receptive in their response to our positive feedback and suggestions. Jerard is head of the politically-nominated Westside/Mid-City Sector Council.

We don't always see eye to eye, but we've worked pretty well with Metro (both staff and the Board) to give them the grassroots political cover to do what they really want: create a first-rate countywide mass transit network.

Whether it's your time, thoughts, donations, energy or a combination thereof, you all help The Transit Coalition is trying to do what the BRU and other well-meaning transit groups once did: have the citizenry and politicians achieve political consensus to use transportation/planning to create a better 21st-century L.A. County.

[gibiscus]

Whichever corridor is finally chosen, there should be a transfer station where it crosses the Metrolink line.

[kenalpern]

Absolutely--hopefully such a station would enhance ridership of both lines!

[unico]

an east side extension should run down atlantic from pomona and atl to all the way past bell. it can eventually connect with a blue line extension that should run down randolph from the slauson junction. and pssoible conect to the green line. this makes most sens. not just because i live in the area but because it is the most denseley populated area of the county outside of the macarthur park, pico union area. light rail is needed south of east LA and east of south LA. south east LA. rail line existed in the past, and an actaul line that ended in whittier ran from the slauson junction thru HP, MWD and Bell all the way to whittier. it existed in the 1920's the 1950's and it should be the next big "eastside" project. this area is more densely populated than east la proper, pasadena, whittier, montebello, and it is very park poor. i imagine and orange line type of route, but with light rail. the space and tracks exist to have rail and bike paths connecting to the river bike paths and other areas. makes sense to me. am i alone?

[erict]

I agree with that observation - Atlantic is one of the busiest streets in SoCal.