|
Post by bobdavis on Feb 27, 2015 3:29:49 GMT -8
From the GLFE Construction Board meeting last night: 6 of the 10 traction power substations are energized, 3 are connected and one remains to be connected to the local utility. The four that have not been energized are all at the east end of the line. Parking structures are in various stages of completion: Arcadia is almost done, Monrovia is getting finishing touches, Irwindale ran into some construction challenges, but is now moving ahead and should be done in time, Azusa-Citrus is making good progress. Duarte has a surface parking lot in progress, and the one laggard is Azusa-downtown, which involves the City of Azusa and Foothill Transit as well as GLFE. If all goes well it should be done by December, and there are contingency plans if it's not ready by the time revenue service begins. More train testing is scheduled to start mid-March; by then most of the trolley wire should be up and hot. Photos from Alan Weeks showed messenger cable up between Virginia Ave. and Irwindale over the eastbound track, that just leaves the westbound track plus the yard leads in Monrovia without wire, and some final installation and adjustment in Arcadia. The project is on course for turnover to Metro in September. It's uncertain how long Metro will take to certify the extension as ready for revenue service; (personal opinion: there may be some interest in being able to run trains to the Rose Parade if possible).
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 2, 2015 10:39:42 GMT -8
I came across this interesting piece of news back in January, took an aerial view of the place in question, then forgot to post the info here. Train buffs are going to love this: www.monroviaweekly.com/community/gold-line-maintenance-operations-yard-nears-completion-in-monrovia/One nice detail for train watchers–there will even be viewing area. There is a small park planned for the northwest corner of facility at California and Evergreen, from which the public can view the yard operations. According to Lisa Levy Buch of the Gold Line Construction Authority, the park will be planted with drought tolerant plants, oak trees and other ornamental shade trees. There will even be benches and a decorative fence with a California poppy motif (the accent color in the yard is “poppy.” Of course). Even the walkways will have a light sprinkling of orange speckles. Boulders removed from the site during construction will be used in landscaping this area. The park apparently is going to be in the upper left corner as seen here: And a close up of the park location: Oops, got an error adding the second attachment. Will try in the next post... RT
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 2, 2015 10:42:13 GMT -8
Same error, it looks like there is an attachment space limit for the forum. And it is now exceeded. Oh well, easy enough to look up on Google Maps.
RT
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 2, 2015 22:17:30 GMT -8
Rubbertoe: Thanks for the article about the Operations Campus; I went by there today and saw more work in progress on the trolley wire, and some finishing touches being applied to the access track on Shamrock.
Update: Messenger cable is in place on both tracks between Irwindale and Virginia Ave. (Azusa). Trolley wire between Arcadia station and the IFS appears to have most, if not all of the permanent suspension clips fastened. That leaves less than two miles of trolley wire to be installed (one mile of line, both sides.) There appeared to be safety grounds in place east of Mayflower in Monrovia, so there are still some final adjustments and connections to be made.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 15, 2015 15:37:34 GMT -8
Did a quick survey today--looks like all wire is up in the Operations Campus, just needs some tension adjustments and final attachments. Still no trolley wire hanging from the messenger cable between Virginia Ave. and Irwindale station--this would appear to be the only gap in the system. I plan to attend the special board meeting on Wednesday for the latest updates.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Mar 17, 2015 10:12:49 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 18, 2015 21:33:38 GMT -8
I was at the GLFE board meeting tonight and learned that the Mass Electric overhead lines workers have been concentrating on the Operations Campus so that it will be ready for test trains in the next few weeks. It was reported that work is shifting to that final gap east of Irwindale this week. The shop complex should be ready by June, and Metro will be sending the new cars that should start arriving by June or July to Monrovia. This will give them a place for testing that won't interfere with revenue runs. 8 of the 10 substations have been energized, and the last 2 should be done soon. A look at the meeting agenda showed that there are no litigation matters pending; the case in Arcadia has been settled.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 21, 2015 20:42:38 GMT -8
Went out to Perris today for the Steampunk event at Orange Empire, but stopped in Irwindale and Azusa to confirm that the last segments of trolley wire are in place. Next week will probably see the Mass Electric workers busily attaching the hangers to the wire, just like the Pacific Electric crews did a hundred years ago when building the San Bernardino Line. On the way home this evening I went by the Monrovia Operations Campus and found the shop building lit up! Last time I was this excited by seeing a structure illuminated was back around 2001 when I saw the Sierra Madre Villa parking facility lit up in anticipation of the original Gold Line going into service.
Yesterday I received an update from the GLFE that a Metro LRV is now in Monrovia for testing the overheard wires in the yard. Presumably it's tucked away in the shop building right now.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 29, 2015 20:29:49 GMT -8
Gold Line update: Rail grinding has been done in Monrovia and Duarte; apparently light-rail cars require a different head profile than standard railroad equipment. Just a few finishing touches are needed at the Operations Campus. The last segments of wire between Virginia Ave. in Azusa and the Irwindale station are awaiting attachment of the permanent hangers near the Virginia end. The substation east of Virginia has been hooked up to the Azusa power system, but the cables to the overhead haven't been connected yet. I didn't do a complete survey, but all the other substation locations I checked had the DC feeders connected. Metro LRV 708 was sitting next to the GLOC with a Trackmobile or similar industrial switcher coupled to it.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Apr 1, 2015 18:38:44 GMT -8
Went by the GLOC today, found a crew loading one of the rail grinder units onto a low-bed truck. The old movie cliche "My work is done here" came to mind. Maybe it's heading to Santa Monica to work on Expo II. And one of the Breda LRVs was in the yard, but with the industrial switcher still next to it.
|
|
|
Post by joshuanickel on Apr 1, 2015 20:21:59 GMT -8
Went by the GLOC today, found a crew loading one of the rail grinder units onto a low-bed truck. The old movie cliche "My work is done here" came to mind. Maybe it's heading to Santa Monica to work on Expo II. And one of the Breda LRVs was in the yard, but with the industrial switcher still next to it. I doubt it is going to Santa Monica. The people installing the rails is a different contractor that has their own equipment. If anything were to come to help out on Expo, it would be the Mass Electric crews to assist with the OCS installation since there is a large gap in the OCS between Sepulveda Station and Centinela.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Apr 1, 2015 21:36:34 GMT -8
I didn't go out to Azusa today, but Mass Electric must be just about done with the overhead. Looks like they've finished with the Operations Campus, and the contact wire is in place between Irwindale and Virginia Ave--it just needs the permanent hangers fastened to the wire. Some of the feeder cables from the substations to the overhead system still needed to be connected last time I looked, but that's about it for the OCS.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Apr 5, 2015 18:37:19 GMT -8
Regarding the criticism I've been hearing leveled at Phase 2B to Montclair, most of it centers around how the line will essentially be a slower duplicate of the Metrolink SB line.
However, I had a sudden realization about the project. Montclair really isn't the destination. People from LA County aren't going to ride an hour or hour and a half to get to Montclair.
What the critics are overlooking is that Montclair is a major transit hub in the IE. It's served by multiple Omnitrans lines, the Riverside Transit Agency has express connections there, and of course it's the termination point for multiple Foothill Transit lines serving the SGV.
The advantage of Montclair is that it opens connections from the IE. I don't think many SGV commuters are looking for better transit to the IE, but I'm pretty sure that IE commuters will welcome better connections to the SGV. 12 minute headways from Montclair, if that happens, will make connections much easier since right now you have premium fare commuter buses that run about every 10 minutes (only at peak), the Silver Streak every 20 minutes at peak, and Metrolink every 20-60 minutes.
The only thing that would be needed to really complete the picture would be for Omnitrans to terminate one of the new sbX BRT routes there. So far, at their current build-out pace, I'd expect to see Metro servicing Montclair years before an sbX arrives, and that's kind of a sad indictment of public transit in San Bernardino County.
|
|
|
Post by joemagruder on Apr 6, 2015 3:51:23 GMT -8
I wouldn't expect people going from Claremont to Los Angeles to use light rail. Metrolink makes much more sense. But people going from Claremont to Azusa or Pasadena may well. I seldom ride a transit line from end to end, but often ride from one midpoint to another midpoint.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Apr 6, 2015 7:41:07 GMT -8
I wouldn't expect people going from Claremont to Los Angeles to use light rail. Metrolink makes much more sense. But people going from Claremont to Azusa or Pasadena may well. I seldom ride a transit line from end to end, but often ride from one midpoint to another midpoint. That is the problem. As many have pointed out here, most of these light rail stations are in terrible locations for pedestrians and are not near destinations. Expo stations are in single family home areas and not near apartments or retail locations in many cases. Ditto for the Green Line and the Gold Line. Are people really going to go from Claremont to Monrovia or Arcadia on light rail when they need pretty much need a car when they get to their destination once they get to Arcadia or Monrovia in many cases? People always point out Pasadena, but even the Lake station is in the middle of the freeway and several blocks from where the heart of the street starts on Colorado and points South. Are people going to do that walk? Lets hope so.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Apr 6, 2015 9:40:29 GMT -8
That is the problem. As many have pointed out here, most of these light rail stations are in terrible locations for pedestrians and are not near destinations. Expo stations are in single family home areas and not near apartments or retail locations in many cases. Ditto for the Green Line and the Gold Line. Are people really going to go from Claremont to Monrovia or Arcadia on light rail when they need pretty much need a car when they get to their destination once they get to Arcadia or Monrovia in many cases? People always point out Pasadena, but even the Lake station is in the middle of the freeway and several blocks from where the heart of the street starts on Colorado and points South. Are people going to do that walk? Lets hope so. There's no reason not to leverage the rail grid as a connection backbone. Metro and Pasadena ARTS need to beef up their Gold Line connections in Pasadena. Foothill Transit can do the same with the new extensions stations. If wishes were horses, then it's a damn shame that the original Santa Fe right of way along Walnut in Pasadena wasn't repurposed when they abandoned it back in '78 or so. That route would have made a much better alignment for the Gold Line than its present alignment, and Caltrans even built a bridge for the 210 over the old ROW at Sierra Madre Villa. But nobody thought to preserve it, so we're now stuck with ugly, asinine freeway-median stations in one of the most dense parts of the SGV.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Apr 6, 2015 12:51:32 GMT -8
Regarding the criticism I've been hearing leveled at Phase 2B to Montclair, most of it centers around how the line will essentially be a slower duplicate of the Metrolink SB line. However, I had a sudden realization about the project. Montclair really isn't the destination. People from LA County aren't going to ride an hour or hour and a half to get to Montclair. What the critics are overlooking is that Montclair is a major transit hub in the IE. It's served by multiple Omnitrans lines, the Riverside Transit Agency has express connections there, and of course it's the termination point for multiple Foothill Transit lines serving the SGV. The advantage of Montclair is that it opens connections from the IE. I don't think many SGV commuters are looking for better transit to the IE, but I'm pretty sure that IE commuters will welcome better connections to the SGV. 12 minute headways from Montclair, if that happens, will make connections much easier since right now you have premium fare commuter buses that run about every 10 minutes (only at peak), the Silver Streak every 20 minutes at peak, and Metrolink every 20-60 minutes. The only thing that would be needed to really complete the picture would be for Omnitrans to terminate one of the new sbX BRT routes there. So far, at their current build-out pace, I'd expect to see Metro servicing Montclair years before an sbX arrives, and that's kind of a sad indictment of public transit in San Bernardino County. Actually, if what you are saying is true, the argument for Gold Line is even worse. You can achieve the same SGV-IE connection with electrification and double track of Metrolink SB line and running it with 20 minutes headway between SGV and Ontario. Metrolink also runs to the part of SGV where the jobs are located. The only advantage of extending Gold Line to Montclair is that it offers a one-seat ride to Pasadena and Downtown LA. If not many people will ride it in this fashion, then the rationale for extending it is what exactly? No matter how you look at it, the better investment in this corridor is Metrolink SB line.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Apr 6, 2015 13:58:30 GMT -8
The problem with double-tracking and electrification of Metrolink's SB line is, frankly, Metrolink. They're running the service as a commuter line, with commuter pricing. All the station amenities and connections (with a few exceptions like Montclair - El Monte doesn't even qualify since the buses are several blocks away!) are oriented around cars, not transit. On top of that, since most of the stations are surrounded by low-density suburban housing (with the minor exception of TOD condo complexes at Montclair and Clairmont) they wouldn't be able to generate the foot traffic needed without intense re-development.
More frequent service along the SB line would be great, especially since I'm using it every day. I just don't see how they're going to attract more riders even with electrification and double tracks unless they cut their ticket prices (since higher ridership at lower fares could meet or exceed current revenue).
Also, the Gold Line routing will cover the northern part of the SGV, while the SB line runs more in the middle. It's easy to say that the efforts are competitive, but they're really more complementary aside from the 3 stations that are shared (La Verne, Clairmont and Montclair). The San Dimas station is located right in the middle of that city's commercial district, and is right in between (and a bit north of) the Metrolink La Verne and Covina stations. The Glendora station will be almost 3 miles north and 1 mile east of Metrolink's Covina station.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Apr 6, 2015 15:05:17 GMT -8
The problem with double-tracking and electrification of Metrolink's SB line is, frankly, Metrolink. They're running the service as a commuter line, with commuter pricing. All the station amenities and connections (with a few exceptions like Montclair - El Monte doesn't even qualify since the buses are several blocks away!) are oriented around cars, not transit. On top of that, since most of the stations are surrounded by low-density suburban housing (with the minor exception of TOD condo complexes at Montclair and Clairmont) they wouldn't be able to generate the foot traffic needed without intense re-development. Pricing and service pattern can be changed. If we are running bi-directional 20 minutes headway like I suggested, we are not running a commuter service anymore - we are running a local service - and it needs to the priced accordingly. But ultimately, the service that is incorrectly priced here is Gold Line, not Metrolink... Distanced based fare is preferable and most equitable pricing scheme in the suburbs. And all the zoning issue you mentioned also applies to a lot of the Gold Line stations. SGV in general is severely under zoned. It can probably support 5 million people easily but has stuck at the 2 million people with no sprawl-able land left. BTW, I'm not a SGV hater... I grew up in SGV and lived there until I went to college. Electrification generally will lower the operating cost significantly and thus allowing more frequent service. It's more of the advantage of electrification. I don't disagree at all. Gold Line Foothill and Metrolink SB Line serve different markets in SGV. But they share right of way going into San Bernanrdino County and that's where I really have a problem with the investment. This is what I would support: 1. Extend Gold Line to Pomona Metrolink Station. 2. Electrify the SB line and run a metro-like schedule (this kind of service fairly typical overseas but unusual in the US) between SB and Covina or El Monte, then people can transfer at Pomona if they want to go to Azusa or Pasadena. 3. The existing SB line can be folded into the new metro-like SB line schedule so every hour or so, one of the train will continue from SB to Covina (or El Monte) to Union Station.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Apr 13, 2015 21:44:00 GMT -8
Quick survey observations: Yesterday (Sunday Apr. 11) the Mass Electric overhead wire crew was working between Sierra Madre Villa and the Baldwin Ave. area. Today, Metro LRV 708 was spotted on the new track east of SMV. I checked at Virginia Ave. in Azusa and it looks like the trolley wire has the permanent hangers in place. Also noted that the feeder cables are connected to the overhead from the sub east of Virginia. Various "loose ends" were being tidied up at the GLOC, and the area once occupied by the construction office trailers had stakes in place, probably for the public viewing area part of the project. Next month we'll have the "open house" at GLOC and the facility should be done by the end of June.
|
|
|
Post by bzzzt on Apr 13, 2015 21:44:24 GMT -8
Zooming by on the freeway this morning, it looks like the OCS wiring is connected at Sierra Madre Villa. There was a single LR car set to be towed on the new track as well.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Apr 14, 2015 6:05:38 GMT -8
Zooming by on the freeway this morning, it looks like the OCS wiring is connected at Sierra Madre Villa. There was a single LR car set to be towed on the new track as well. They've had a single trainset being towed around both new tracks at Sierra Madre Villa since the weekend; I saw it on the north tracks on Sunday morning, and on the south tracks Sunday evening.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Apr 16, 2015 6:49:42 GMT -8
Drove down the 210 last night around 7pm and saw for the first time that the Foothill Extension is now connected to the main line catenary. This happened within the last week. I'm surprised I didn't see anything about this on The Source.
RT
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Apr 17, 2015 0:38:10 GMT -8
There was a Mass Electric crew working east of SMV last Sunday--they were probably putting the finishing touches on the connections. This afternoon I was in Arcadia and noticed a caution sign posted at the First Ave. grade crossing. There was a crew working on the signals a few weeks ago, so we may be ready for some live testing in that area. I haven't checked every location, but I think all the subs are now connected to the trolley wires. This will probably be confirmed at next Wednesday's board meeting in Monrovia.
|
|
|
Post by TransportationZ on Apr 17, 2015 6:37:36 GMT -8
Sorry, but the existing Metrolink Line needs the investment more than these Gold Line Extensions. Current riders are experiencing terrible delays from the single tracking. One train breaks down and the whole rush hour commute is screwed. One train 5 minutes late could mean 3 or 4 trains 10 minutes late. Riding a reverse rush hour train is like a salmon going up stream, you sit 3 or 4 times throughout the trip for 5 minutes waiting for late rush hour trains to get through the single track sections. It's no surprise ridership is falling. The line has allot of potential but it's being put on the back burner despite its high ridership for a Commuter rail line. It makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Apr 17, 2015 12:54:40 GMT -8
Sorry, but the existing Metrolink Line needs the investment more than these Gold Line Extensions. Current riders are experiencing terrible delays from the single tracking. One train breaks down and the whole rush hour commute is screwed. One train 5 minutes late could mean 3 or 4 trains 10 minutes late. Riding a reverse rush hour train is like a salmon going up stream, you sit 3 or 4 times throughout the trip for 5 minutes waiting for late rush hour trains to get through the single track sections. It's no surprise ridership is falling. The line has allot of potential but it's being put on the back burner despite its high ridership for a Commuter rail line. It makes no sense. Here's to hoping that Art Leahy can get some of that turned around once he takes over the hot seat at the SCRRA.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Apr 17, 2015 15:36:34 GMT -8
Sorry, but the existing Metrolink Line needs the investment more than these Gold Line Extensions. Current riders are experiencing terrible delays from the single tracking. One train breaks down and the whole rush hour commute is screwed. One train 5 minutes late could mean 3 or 4 trains 10 minutes late. Riding a reverse rush hour train is like a salmon going up stream, you sit 3 or 4 times throughout the trip for 5 minutes waiting for late rush hour trains to get through the single track sections. It's no surprise ridership is falling. The line has allot of potential but it's being put on the back burner despite its high ridership for a Commuter rail line. It makes no sense. Here's to hoping that Art Leahy can get some of that turned around once he takes over the hot seat at the SCRRA. Metrolink does have some double track projects slated for the Ventura Line and Antelope Valley Line. Right now, they are just studying improving the San Berdoo Line, although I believe there might be a siding project here or there. Other than that, they will need a Measure R+ for any real upgrades most likely.
|
|
|
Post by johanragle on Apr 18, 2015 7:49:09 GMT -8
Strange that they're focusing so much effort on the lines with the lowest ridership. You would think they'd put more effort into their single highest ridership route... although I'm guessing it has to do with reticence on the part of SANBAG not wanting to commit more funding.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Apr 20, 2015 23:57:34 GMT -8
Test trains are running this week and will probably continue for several weeks. Here's Metro 704, east of Mayflower Ave. in Monrovia. It was running at very restricted speed, but a Metro employee at the crossing assured me that the trains will soon be running faster.
|
|
|
Post by bzzzt on Apr 27, 2015 21:22:38 GMT -8
Saw a two-car set on the tracks just west of the basket bridge at 8:30pm tonight, after dark. Stopped and lit up w/ workers inside, working late.
|
|