|
|
Post by crzwdjk on Dec 23, 2009 8:52:26 GMT -8
There's already a bridge over Colorado, so my guess is that they will keep that grade as-is, and have a transition from there to the crossing over Santa Anita. On the other side of the station, there's also an existing grade separation at Huntington.
|
|
|
|
Post by travelman on Dec 23, 2009 19:50:44 GMT -8
Correct on the bridges, so except where the line crosses 1st street (?) downtown for the station, I think Arcadia will be all grade separated.. Smart on their part, nice of them to pay for it.. From what I remember, lots of back up from the 210 south on Santa Anita, so the bridge is a good thing...
|
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Feb 12, 2010 1:14:29 GMT -8
Latest news from Trainorders.com: According to one of the TO members, BNSF has called for a crew to make a special run Sunday morning (Feb 14) to pull the two cars currently spotted on a spur next to the end of the ex-ATSF 2nd District in Arcadia. One of the cars is a former SP business car 151 ("Pine Bluff") which now has all its windows boarded up (most of them were broken by vandals, and the car interior has reportedly suffered a lot of damage). The other car is an old boxcar painted for a movie or TV job. Both cars have roller bearings, and Pine Bluff has new air brake hoses. Part of the crew's task will be to remove the idle double-stack cars that have been stored on the track between Miller Brewing and Arcadia. Not sure if they will be returned to their resting spots after the Arcadia relics are pulled; my guess is that they will be taken elsewhere (much to the relief of residents near the tracks). One of the preliminary steps in the GLFE project is having the track west of Miller Brewing (Irwindale on the timetable--in ancient times it was Kincaid) officially removed from the US railroad system, probably by the Surface Transportation Board, and this clearing of the cars may be part of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Feb 14, 2010 18:03:43 GMT -8
The special BNSF move mentioned earlier has happened, and at last report the ex-SP business car and the privately owned boxcar were sitting at or near the Miller brewery in Irwindale. The idle doublestack cars are back where they were in Monrovia and Arcadia, but it's no big deal to move them when the time comes. The story I heard on the ex-SP car was that the owner had died and his family had a rather exaggerated idea of what it was worth. It now has reporting marks for MREX, which is Monad RR Equipment, which deals in vintage cars for movies and private owners. Not sure if Monad bought it or has made arrangements with the owners to store the car (they have a yard in La Mirada) and use their reporting mark. Be that as it may, it's now out of its long-time resting place and the fear by some that it would get land-locked and have to be taken out by heavy-machinery movers or cut up for scrap on site had been answered.
|
|
|
|
Post by rajacobs on Feb 23, 2010 16:36:09 GMT -8
Lindsay William-Ross references the the Pasadena Star-News ( laist.com/2010/02/01/gold_line_extension.php) that "It looks like June is when we'll see the groundbreaking for the MTA Gold Line's Foothill Extension." Whether it's due to new leadership or that the project will bring in ~7,000 new jobs, project start-up is much anticipated. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 23, 2010 17:08:57 GMT -8
Gold Line Phase 2a has been in design-build procurement phase since October. So June sounds reasonable for a groundbreaking.
|
|
|
|
Post by rajacobs on Feb 24, 2010 10:56:39 GMT -8
Just found another report on Metro's The Source, from Steve Hymon: thesource.metro.net/2010/02/18/foothill-agreement-delayed/Foothill Agreement DelayedThe Board of Director’s Measure R committee delayed voting until next month on an agreement with the Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority over how to transfer funds between Metro and the Authority. The Authority is a separate agency set up to build the first phase of the Foothill Extension between Pasadena and Azusa. Authority officials are unhappy because they are gunning for a June groundbreaking on the project and say that’s in jeopardy without an agreement. Board Member Zev Yaroslavsky said he just got the agreement on Wednesday. “There are a lot of unanswered questions in this report,” he said, specifically mentioning the issue of whether the agreement commits Metro to spending money on phase 2b of the Foothill Extension from Azusa to Montclair. Committee chair and Board Member Pam O’Connor said that she didn’t even know the item was going to be on the agenda. Meanwhile, Metro CEO Art Leahy told the committee that a delay wouldn’t impact the project and that the issues could be worked out. Foothill Construction Authority CEO Habib Balian said afterward that a delay could mean pushing the groundbreaking on the project from June to July. The first structure to be built is a bridge in Arcadia that takes tracks from the middle of the 210 to south of the freeway and he can’t solicit bids from construction firms without an agreement in place. This is all a long way of saying that the item will be back for the committee to review in March. One other thought on politics. The reason this is important is that San Gabriel Valley officials have fought for many years for the Foot hill Extension. Metro is currently going to Washington to secure federal funds for a number of transit projects. Squabbling in L.A. County over this project — which some members of Congress are closely watching — or any other project is not the way to present a unified front in Washington. -- Steve Hymon |
|
|
|
Post by rajacobs on Mar 9, 2010 10:33:43 GMT -8
Design recommendation for the Foothill Extension bridge over the 210 Freeway:  |
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 16, 2010 11:11:31 GMT -8
At the 1:00pm meeting tomorrow of the MTA's planning and programming committee meeting, they will again consider the Foothill Extension funding agreement: "consider approving Funding Agreement term sheet and Master Cooperative Agreement term sheet to allow the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) to finalize agreements with the Pasadena Metro Blue Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority (MBLFECA) for construction of the Gold Line from its current terminus at Sierra Madre Villa in Pasadena to Azusa." Looks like a June groundbreaking for the 210 iconic bridge is still on track. Here are the 42 pages in all their glory... www.metro.net/board/Items/2010/03_March/20100318MRPDItem10.pdfRT |
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 16, 2010 11:30:07 GMT -8
Reading through the 42 pages it looks like the sticking point from last month might have been related to the issue of eminent domain of facilities for the O&M site. There are pages and pages of discussion about how it will happen, and that construction can't begin (except for the IBS) until the land parcels have been acquired or in the process.
Also, it looks like the LACMTA will be maintaining control of $146,180,000 of the funds for their own expenses, all of which are detailed. Maybe they are just looking to keep some of their people employed given the recession and all.
There was also $2.55 million left over from the original; Gold Line construction that is being applied to this project.
RT
|
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 18, 2010 14:56:16 GMT -8
Per Steve at the Source: " A little news out of the Metro Board of Director’s planning committee meeting on Wednesday: A funding transfer agreement with the Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority was moved to the full Metro Board for their consideration at next Thursday’s meeting.
I know. That sounds like a bunch of bureaucratic gobblygook. Translated to English, the deal is this: In order for the Foothill Extension to be built from Pasadena to Azusa, Metro has to transfer Measure R funds to the Construction Authority. The Authority is an independent agency set up to build the line. Once built, Metro will then operate it.
The agreement is needed in order for the Authority to go out and solicit construction bids to build the line — they plan to break ground on the line this summer and want to complete it by 2013. (Bids have already been solicited for the bridge over the eastbound lanes of the 210 freeway).
There was one wrinkle that developed yesterday. The planning committee moved the agreement to the full board without their recommendation on how to vote for it. Why? Foothill and Metro officials are still working on an issue involving the extent of Metro’s participation in the construction process. It basically comes down to who has final say on how the line is constructed — the Construction Authority or Metro?
Staff from both agencies are scheduled to meet prior to the Board meeting." Hopefully the Authority will have final say over how the line is constructed. They did a great job on the original Gold Line, and came in under budget. If the process ain't broke, don't fix it. Especially if "fixing it" involves putting the MTA in charge of construction. IMHO  Another week of waiting until 03-25-10. RT |
|
|
|
Post by trackman on Mar 18, 2010 18:52:06 GMT -8
^^^ The same "Authority", but is it in name only?
I honestly do not know; however, the first Gold Line segment was completed long ago and I have doubts the same staff that made that segment such a success, your determination not mine, may no longer be staffed there.
Second point, how do we know the first segment was a success? Coming in on budget? What corners might they have cut? Would anyone here know?
Third, MTA will run the line, and combine it with other lines eventually. They are also funding it. And, they'll maintain it. Which reminds me... that iconic bridge! What the heck is that... and who is going to maintain that? Certainly not Caltrans?
|
|
|
|
Post by rajacobs on Mar 18, 2010 22:36:41 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 25, 2010 12:20:08 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 25, 2010 12:41:16 GMT -8
This is very nice. We will have both Expo Phase 2 and Foothill by 2014 or so. I wish they could also speed up the Downtown Connector so that it could also be built by no more than a few years after.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonyw79sfv on Mar 25, 2010 13:46:31 GMT -8
Gold Line Foothill Extension will be the first Metro Rail project with Measure R funding to break ground. The Orange Line extension is actually the first Measure R project to break ground; but nobody cares about a busway anyways. |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 25, 2010 14:08:22 GMT -8
Wow...we're going to have 3/4 major transit projects under construction come end of 2010 / early 2011
- Orange Line to Chatsworth
- Expo Line to Culver City
- Expo Line Phase II to Santa Monica (pending any legal delays)
- Gold Line Foothill extension
Oh my!
|
|
|
|
Post by rajacobs on Mar 25, 2010 22:17:31 GMT -8
I'm hoping the construction authority will publish more than a handfull of dates and project milestones to the completion of Gold Line Extension Phase IIa. It is exciting to anticipate the line as far as Citrus College.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 25, 2010 22:51:47 GMT -8
Groundbreaking for the Foothill Extension is scheduled for Saturday, June 19. Location to be announced.
|
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 26, 2010 7:07:16 GMT -8
I vote for the ROW on the South side of the 210 where the IBS will be landing. Though it would be tough to have to slog from Santa Anita Av all the way there, which would also involve crossing a RR bridge so maybe that option is out. I was checking Google maps yesterday trying to see if there were any good locations for photographing the bridge construction. The road on the North that parallels the freeway (Forest) is below the freeway, and the trees completely block the view. I didn't check the street view from Rancho Rd yet, could be the same. On the South side, there is a strip of homes directly between all road access and the construction area. The ROW itself in the lower right is likely only for workers. And the triangular property in the lower right between the ROW and the freeway seems to be some kind of storage yard, and it is probably below the ROW in any case. Obvious solution would be if someone here "owned" one of those homes in question and just set up a webcam to save us all the trouble of driving out and taking construction photos periodically  |
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 26, 2010 18:10:59 GMT -8
I think the triangular property is part of the US Forest Service station. It's probably off limits to the curious (trespassers will be smacked with a shovel by a bear wearing a Forest Ranger hat) and yes, the railroad grade is above the USFS yard and the residences. Likely spots for the groundbreaking (even though it's officially for the "Iconic Freeway Structure", i.e., the bridge) would be the future site of the Arcadia station or the nearby site of the old Arcadia Santa Fe station. Not to be snide, but I suspect that politicians would like to avoid the hike to the IFS site. If you log into "IWillRide.org", you'll see a picture of me doing the unofficial early pre-groundbreaking almost a year ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 27, 2010 22:59:13 GMT -8
Went to the track Friday afternoon and stopped by the site of the Arcadia station. Took two shots to have a couple "before" pics. First one is looking West from right under the sign that you see in the second pic. Second pic is looking East. As you can see, there is quite a bit of room here. Not sure if that building in the background of the first shot will be taken. It is part of what looks to be a sheet metal fab shop of some kind, and includes the building behind it too. Not a lot of development close by the station, but Santa Anita Av is only a block away. It will be interesting to see what they do with the area surrounding the station in terms of TOD in the coming years. There are many more destinations within walking distance of the Pasadena stops versus this one, though I didn't scour the neighborhood. It is less than a mile walk from the racetrack, which is my primary interest...   |
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Apr 9, 2010 22:21:15 GMT -8
Groundbreaking has been rescheduled for June 26. Location not yet announced, but will probably be in Arcadia. I'm glad they changed the date--now it does not conflict with Pacific Electric weekend at Orange Empire.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Apr 10, 2010 10:29:52 GMT -8
How much is the current total cost estimate? My calculations are 810 milion /12.6 miles = 71 million per mile, with 6 new stations (1/2 station per mile). Not bad compared to Expo, but not exactly cheap. Could the price end up lower depending on bids?
|
|
|
|
Post by rajacobs on Apr 18, 2010 7:47:35 GMT -8
At last report, the maintenance facility for the Gold Line is expected to be in Monrovia, a block or two east of the historic Monrovia (ex Santa Fe) station. I was told that the Irwindale site presented accessibility problems. |
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Apr 22, 2010 16:37:39 GMT -8
I go to Citrus College, so i'll be able to provide a little info on progress, perhaps in the form of photos. ;D
BTW, i've heard the abandoned freight cars at Irwindale are gonna be moved soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Transit Coalition on Apr 22, 2010 16:54:10 GMT -8
I go to Citrus College, so i'll be able to provide a little info on progress, perhaps in the form of photos. ;D BTW, i've heard the abandoned freight cars at Irwindale are gonna be moved soon. Excuse me Josh: Why would you make a statement that you know nothing about? What exact information do you have that there are abandoned freight cars on the line near / at Irwindale? I expect an answer. You need to be real careful about putting misinformation up on our boards. |
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Apr 22, 2010 21:03:19 GMT -8
I've been by this area nearly EVERY day (probably more than you). On the ROW near the brewery, there are freight cars that are NEVER used. NEVER. So I actually DO know a lot about this. Not sure why you assumed I DIDN'T.
Not sure what the fuss is about. What "information" are you exactly looking for? Official confirmation from the MTA?
|
|
|
|
Post by Transit Coalition on Apr 22, 2010 22:52:13 GMT -8
I've been by this area nearly EVERY day (probably more than you). On the ROW near the brewery, there are freight cars that are NEVER used. NEVER. So I actually DO know a lot about this. Not sure why you assumed I DIDN'T. Not sure what the fuss is about. What "information" are you exactly looking for? Official confirmation from the MTA? You made a statement that they are "abandoned". How would you know that? The truth is that they are in storage, just like 100's of 1,000's of freight cars across the country. And some railroad company is getting paid for those cars to be parked where they are. Fortunately, there are signs that the economy is coming back and small percents of the stored cars are going back into service. |
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Apr 23, 2010 6:34:40 GMT -8
Not sure why you clearly were offended by what I said.
Okay, bad choice of words then. Be that as it may, that absolutely doesn't change the fact that they are are almost NEVER used. Besides, they aren't the only ones. In residential areas there've been freight cars just sitting there and they're an eyesore to the community, especially when they're targets for grafetti.
How do I know THIS? I watch the news. Several months ago on ABC7 there was a report that along the Foothill ROW there were more "stored" freight cars that were being tagged on, and that they've been degraded the community.
|
|
