Construction of Phase 2A to Azusa

[metrocenter]

Gold Line opens bidding on $450 million extension phase,
tests new public-private partnership model



The Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority opened bidding Tuesday on Phase 2A of the light rail's extension toward Azusa, a project officials estimate will cost more than $450 million.

Under a public-private partnership, the winning contractor will design, build and finance the project. The capital costs would be repaid through funds from Measure R, the half-cent county sales tax voters approved in November 2008 to fund transportation infrastructure improvements.

Phase 2A includes light rail alignment work, including on 11.5 miles of track; utilities; crossings and systems; six stations; several bridges; and a 25-acre maintenance facility that will service about 80 to 100 vehicles.

The Foothill extension, the first project to break ground under Measure R, is also spearheading a trend toward public-private partnerships in California.

The idea is to front-load the costs and build sooner in order to save money, officials said.

Measure R guarantees full funding for the Gold Line extension - minus a "gap" of $500,000 - but was scheduled for a completion date of 2017. With help from private investment, however, completion can be moved up to 2013, officials say.

"We knew we would get the Measure R funds on a funding stream over a nine-year period," said Habib Balian, CEO of the Construction Authority, "and we knew we could construct it in four."

Meanwhile, Balian said, the economy was slowing down, and Metro was seeing less revenue than the agency had anticipated.

"We looked at the spending curve if we built it in the most efficient way possible," said Balian.

After running the numbers, he said, the Construction Authority asked "what would happen if we financed that gap," realized it was feasible and that a public-private partnership would be "a wise way to proceed," he said.

Even compared with the interest Metro will have to pay back, the savings are dramatic. Advancing the project by three years, Balian said, will save around $80 million.

"This may cost $30 million or $50 million to finance, (but) it may cost $80 million or $100 million if we built it more slowly," he said, adding that a savings of around 4 million car rides each year is "probably more valuable than the money."

Bob Schraeder, business development manager for Shimmick Construction Inc., a short-listed company in the bidding that has previously worked with Metro on the Orange Line and Eastside Extension, said the design-build-finance concept is a new one for the United States.

"We refer to it as `gap funding.' It has not really been done before in the States," he said, adding that Shimmick's finance partner, Bank of America/Merryl Lynch, has experience in similar ventures.

Mike Aparicio, vice president of transit and operations in Los Angeles for Skanska, another short-listed company that won the first contract in Phase 2A for an $18-million bridge project, said "there are many potential public-private projects throughout California being talked about - but the Foothill Extension is one of the first that has matured to procurement."

Both Aparicio and Schraeder said they see a trend toward public-private partnerships gaining momentum in California and beyond.

"We think that in California public agencies look like they are embracing public-private partnerships as a viable alternative for delivery," said Aparicio.

Progressive owners, said Schrader, "are seeing how they can get the work built sooner, take advantage of the fact that construction costs have come down and contractors are hungry, and make up funding shortfalls."

Balian noted the bridge project awarded to Skanska came in well under the Construction Authority's estimate of $24 million.

The hope, said Schrader, is that the Gold Line project can be "a model for other heavy civil construction jobs that have gap funding."

Construction on of the extension to Azusa will be completed in 2014; to Montclair in 2019; and Ontario in 2021. Balian called it "lightening speed" for a project of its size.

Proposals are due Jan. 27, 2011, and the Construction Authority says it anticipates an award in April 2011.

[e-mail]

626-578-6300, ext. 4444

Read more: www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_15955017#ixzz0yIG8sbJG

[metrocenter]

Conclusion: actual construction to start in Summer 2011.

[Gokhan]

This project will be almost built simultaneously with Expo Phase 2. Expo Phase 2 is having its iconic Venice bridge being designed right now and Foothill is having its iconic 210 bridge designed. These bridges both should start being constructed in early 2011.

Expo Phase 2's could be awarded a few months before the Foothill contract, as early as in January 2011.

So little is known about the Foothill extension. Is it going to be a rapid-transit-like line like the Pasadena Gold Line or a trolley-like line like the Gold Line Eastside extension? What will be the speed limit? How are the grade crossings going to be, with gates or traffic lights? How high the fences will be? Given the length of the line, I hope it ends up being like the fast Pasadena Gold Line rather than the slow Eastside extension.

I think CEO Balian is optimisticly speculating about the Claremont and Ontario openings. There is no funding for these at the moment. Also, the 2014 opening to Azusa sounds a little too ambitious as well. 2015 is probably more realistic. But I would love to see both Expo Phase 2 and the Foothill extension opening as early as possible and 2014 for either line would be great.

[masonite]

Sept 1, 2010 12:09:52 GMT -8 Gokhan said:

This project will be almost built simultaneously with Expo Phase 2. Expo Phase 2 is having its iconic Venice bridge being designed right now and Foothill is having its iconic 210 bridge designed. These bridges both should start being constructed in early 2011.

Expo Phase 2's could be awarded a few months before the Foothill contract, as early as in January 2011.

So little is known about the Foothill extension. Is it going to be a rapid-transit-like line like the Pasadena Gold Line or a trolley-like line like the Gold Line Eastside extension? What will be the speed limit? How are the grade crossings going to be, with gates or traffic lights? How high the fences will be? Given the length of the line, I hope it ends up being like the fast Pasadena Gold Line rather than the slow Eastside extension.

I think CEO Balian is optimisticly speculating about the Claremont and Ontario openings. There is no funding for these at the moment. Also, the 2014 opening to Azusa sounds a little too ambitious as well. 2015 is probably more realistic. But I would love to see both Expo Phase 2 and the Foothill extension opening as early as possible and 2014 for either line would be great.

From what I know the Foothill line will be quite fast with stations at a 2-3 mile distance, which is somewhere in between Metrolink and light rail distance. It should be easier construction than the Expo Phase II Line.

I agree that the CEO Bailan shouldn't be talking about a Montclair or Ontario opening date as those sections have no funding, but I think his strategy is to make it appear like they do and when funding issues come up he can blame Los Angeles and the MTA and their anti SGV bias.

[James Fujita]

This public-private partnership idea sounds fairly interesting. This is the closest we've come to a privately-owned and operated rail transit system since the days of Henry Huntington (huge chunks of the Japanese rail transit system are private*, and who wouldn't want a Tokyo-sized transit map?).

[ * a far different animal from the botched British privatization effort ]

Balian may be a tad too enthusiastic about Ontario, but that's part of a CEO's job, to cheerlead. (I note that the quote isn't a full quote, but a partial quote with some paraphrasing). He might also be supposing some cost savings from the previously mentioned private partnership as well.

I also agree that the Foothill line is going to be a quick one. We're talking about a pre-existing railroad ROW (ala the Blue Line), being converted to new tracks and new electric power, and stations set at the right distance for a commuter train, rather than a trolley line.

Dedicated ROW + bridges over major streets + electric equipment + station placement = Foothill Express

[metrocenter]

I think the Arcadia misses the mark. Back in 2004, The City of Arcadia requested their station to be located up at First and Santa Clara Streets. The DEIR says this was because there was plenty of room for parking there.

I think it was a huge mistake that they didn't put the station just a little farther east, where the ROW crosses over Huntington Drive. Huntington is a very important street, a commercial corridor, too important to miss IMO. The selected location is too far from everything to be very useful.

[bobdavis]

Since the Foothill Extension runs on a former main-line railroad route, I would guess that trains will be authorized for 55 mph (not sure if station spacing allows for higher speeds). Gate protection would more secure (four gates instead of two at the crossings) than the protection in service when the Super Chief went through here, probably at 60 mph. As far as the Arcadia station is concerned, placing it east of First and Santa Clara would involve a much more complicated bit of civil engineering--it might wind up looking like a Chicago Elevated station. Also, the area available for a station is narrower. I think one of the design considerations in Arcadia was to keep the Huntington Dr. overpass looking as much like the existing structure, being a Route 66 landmark.

[jdrcrasher]

Is there any idea of who the main contractor is gonna be?

[James Fujita]

They just opened the bidding this week. It's a bit too early to predict who will win.

I'm sure all of the usual suspects (Parsons, etc.) would love to have this contract, and even some unusual suspects.

[metrocenter]

Shimmick and Skansa are two likely bidders for the contract. (See first post, above.)

[James Fujita]

From the iwillride.org blog:

Yesterday, the Construction Authority issued the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the $450 million Foothill Extension Phase 2A work. This is the big one – the contract that will result in the final design and construction of the track, stations, crossings, rail maintenance facility, and more (in other words, everything you need to build a railroad).

Importantly, the RFP includes a financing component. The winning bidder will enter into a public-private partnership with the Construction Authority and provide private financing to jump start the work ahead of the Measure R dollars all being “in the bank” and will get us a finished line years ahead of the public funding.

Proposals are due January 27, 2011 and the winning team will be announced in April 2011. That is when final design work begins, when you will start seeing activity along the route, and when the bulk of the 7,000 jobs and $1 billion of economic stimulus created by the project starts being realized.

Just a fresher – three teams were prequalified earlier this year. These three are now the only ones competing for this project, and include: (1) Foothill Transit Constructors (Kiewit Pacific Co. and Parsons Transportation Group Inc.); (2) Shimmick Construction Company/URS Corporation; and (3) Skanska USA Civil West California District/Balfour Beatty Rail, Inc.

=

So, I think we've got a pretty good group. all of these are fairly well-known construction companies with their names on previous rail transit construction projects. any of these could be potential winners.

[metrocenter]

I know Skanska from their work on the New York City subway (in particular, the Second Avenue Subway).

I know Kiewit because they were involved (as Shea-Kiewit-Kenny) with the sinkhole in Hollywood, in the 1990s during construction of the Red Line.

I don't know Shimmick. But frankly what I don't know about the construction industry could fill the Pacific Ocean.

[LAofAnaheim]

So what was the point of the groundbreaking this past July? Sounds like a waste of time.....or just "political press goodwill". If I see a groundbreaking I want to see some movement...gosh darn it!

[metrocenter]

The conceptual predecessor of Metro Rail had a groundbreaking too, in 1961. Nothing was ever built.

Groundbreaking ceremonies are mostly just a chance for politicians to get face-time with the TV cameras.

[bobdavis]

A similar groundbreaking was held in San Francisco to mark the start of the new Transbay and High Speed Rail Terminal (first they have to tear down the old Transbay Terminal, which was built in 1937. Concrete that's 70+ years old can be a real "bear" to demolish.) In both cases the event was mostly a chance for local politicians to play around in a sand pile and get applauded for it. One thing about the Gold Line ceremony--there were Members of Congress joining in the fun who would rarely agree on much of anything else. The contract for the I-210 bridge (a.k.a. Iconic Freeway Structure) has been awarded and construction for this part of the job should begin by the end of 2010.
Further comment on the "nature" of the Foothill Extension: Probably the category that fits best would be "Suburban Electric Multiple Unit", similar to the Metra Electric service in the Chicago Area, although with single-level equipment. I haven't studied the matter closely, but I think it will have somewhat fewer stops per ten miles than the San Diego Trolley. It will have fewer stops than the Pacific Electric Monrovia-Glendora line which served the same area until 1951, and be more like outer part of the PE San Bernardino line.

[bobdavis]

Just as an historical note, the Santa Fe line that the Foothill Extension will follow from East Pasadena to Azusa had a maximum authorized speed of 65 MPH for passenger trains, and 60 MPH for freights. The speed dropped to 40 at Arcadia and Azusa, but those will be car stops on the new system anyway. (from AT&SF Los Angeles Division Time Table No. 13, dated 4-25-1965) In other words, faster than any light rail train is likely to go.

[metrocenter]

;D SEIR Now Available For Public Comment ;D

The Phase 2A Supplemental EIR (SEIR) was released yesterday (September 23). The public comment period is now open, through November 8. The Construction Authority will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, October 27 to take comments.

The SEIR must be approved before Metro will release money to the Construction Authority for project construction. The document is here.

Highlights:

• The very large Maintenance and Operations Facility will now be located in Monrovia. This yard and facility will service Gold Line vehicles, and eventually vehicles from other lines (once the Regional Connector is completed). The yard will hold 84 LRVs, and the facilities can hold 20 more.
• New and relocated parking structures at Monrovia and Irwindale stations.
• Realignment of intersection of Duarte/Mountain.
• Replacement of bridges in Arcadia and Irwindale.

[metrocenter]

I've just been reading the SEIR about the proposed maintenance facility in Monrovia. This facility will have everything they need to service, dissassemble, paint, wash, and store dozens of LRVs. Sounds huge. I wonder how it will compare to the Blue Line maintenance facility, in terms of size and capabilities.

[jdrcrasher]

While on my way to Citrus College today, I noticed construction work on the Foothill Blvd underpass. Work appears to be underway on column supports for the overhead rail bridge near Orange Ave.

Not sure if this is related to the extension; perhaps Metro is working on overpasses and underpasses before work on the ROW itself begins? Maybe someone else can fill me in.

[bobdavis]

As far as I know, the contract for the main part of the construction (everything east of the bridge over the 210 in Arcadia) won't be finalized for quite a few months, probably some time next year. Any work prior to that would probably be Metro doing maintenance or a pre-construction evaluation. Haven't seen the plans yet, but according to one report the existing ex-Santa Fe bridge will be retained for freight service to Miller, and an all-new double track bridge will be constructed for the electric railway.

[metrocenter]

Sept 27, 2010 20:29:54 GMT -8 jdrcrasher said:

While on my way to Citrus College today, I noticed construction work on the Foothill Blvd underpass. Work appears to be underway on column supports for the overhead rail bridge near Orange Ave.

Not sure if this is related to the extension; perhaps Metro is working on overpasses and underpasses before work on the ROW itself begins? Maybe someone else can fill me in.

I saw that work too, last Friday. They were working on the base of that overpass. But Bob is right, it's doubtful that was part of Foothill Line construction, since there is no construction contract yet. Maybe evaluation of the bridge, but who knows. The two contractors bidding on the project have until January to get their bids in, and the Foothill Authority will probably select one of them in April.

Moreover, the SEIR isn't even approved yet: it was just released to the public last Thursday. The SEIR must be approved before Metro will release any money for construction of the project to the Foothill Authority. The Authority will probably approve the SEIR in November or December, sometime after the public comment period has ended.

[bobdavis]

It was so much easier in the days of the Huntingtons (either Collis or Henry). Can you imagine trying to build the Pacific Railroad today? "You can't build it there! It's a buffalo grazing area!" "We represent the Beowawe Tribe. White man's iron horse will conflict with our lifestyle."

[metrocenter]

In a world where any gathering of two or more people has veto power, nothing will ever get built. On the other hand, if you give any individual or agency full unchecked power to implement projects, power like Robert Moses or Baron Haussmann had, with the power to destroy whole neighborhoods on a whim, that would be very bad as well.

I think we have a pretty good system. It's good to study construction and operation impacts. But it is a slow process. And the planning authority has to remember to keep opposition in perspective, and not stall every time a few misinformed homeowners start screaming.

[metrocenter]

Sept 27, 2010 20:29:54 GMT -8 jdrcrasher said:

While on my way to Citrus College today, I noticed construction work on the Foothill Blvd underpass. Work appears to be underway on column supports for the overhead rail bridge near Orange Ave.

Today at lunch time, I saw workers replacing the train crossing signal at Duarte/Monrovia on the ROW. They were with a Metrolink truck. Coincidentally (or perhaps not), this is the very intersection they are planning to reconfigure, per the SEIR, to make it safer.

[metrocenter]

Cross-posted in: Expo Phase 1, Expo Phase 2, Foothill Gold, Regional Connector, Purple Line/Westside Subway

Key transit project meetings in October

• 10/04 - Regional Connector: Public Hearing, DEIR
  
• 10/07 - Expo Line: Expo Authority Board
  
• 10/26 - Transit Coalition: Monthly Meeting
  
• 10/27 - Foothill Gold: Public Hearing, Phase 2A SEIR
  
• 10/27 - Foothill Gold: Foothill Authority Board
  
• 10/28 - All Projects: Metro Board Meeting (select LPAs for both subway projects)

[bobdavis]

Regarding what sounds like the Mountain Ave. crossing on the Monrovia-Duarte border: I was in that area a while back and found a Metrolink signal maintainer working on the grade crossing signals and checking the battery. Although no BNSF trains are likely to cross here, Metro is still required to maintain crossing protection until the line is officially abandoned, and Metrolink has the personnel and equipment to take care of non-electrified rail lines. Last time I saw a train in the area, it was the "Miller Job" (aka the Pasadena Turn) crew who had spotted their locomotives just east of the crossing so they could "go to beans" (railroader talk for "do lunch") at one of the nearby eateries: IHOP, Panda Express, etc.

[metrocenter]

Thanks for the background, Bob. Your first-hand accounts of how it's all done are really informative.

On a separate topic, the Monrovia City Manager publishes a weekly report on the web. This week's report includes the following:

Metro - Bridge Widening & Sound Wall Construction
Sema Construction Company continues to work on the Mayflower overhead bridge that includes the installation of a new power pedestal and miscellaneous electrical work. Temporary traffic control delineators are posted. Please observe all construction signs, traffic detour signs, and temporary "no parking" signs. Construction is expected be completed by January.

The heading for that paragraph seems to describe prep work for the Gold Line. Am I reading too much into this?

Cancel that. I drove by the work site today, it was freeway work.

[snuffy]

>Last time I saw a train in the area, it was the "Miller Job" (aka the Pasadena Turn) crew who had spotted their locomotives just east of the crossing so they could "go to beans" (railroader talk for "do lunch") at one of the nearby eateries: IHOP, Panda Express, etc.

Bob, when did you see the train in the area? I used to see them in Arcadia that they came for lunch.

I heard BNSF is negotiating to run the Xmas train one last time.

Snuffy

[bobdavis]

Haven't seen one for quite a while (at least a year). Regarding the Xmas train, apparently the track will remain in place until next year. Metro and BNSF are reportedly working out the details to officially abandon the track west of the San Gabriel River. I've already volunteered to borrow a "claw bar" and do the official "pulling of the first spike" to start the removal of the 1950's era track. It appears that Santa Fe rebuilt the section that will be removed shortly after the Pacific Electric Northern District quit in the early 1950's. There were tower-controlled crossings at Lamanda Park and Arcadia that were no longer needed, so removing the crossing "diamonds" would coincide with rebuilding the track. Not sure if it was actually planned that way, but it seems logical.

[metrocenter]

What's the "Xmas train"?