|
Post by bobdavis on Dec 18, 2012 18:10:27 GMT -8
I just received an e-mail from GLFE. The material currently stored in Duarte is for rebuilding the BNSF, not for the electric railway. That material will be delivered later.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Dec 31, 2012 10:07:23 GMT -8
Drove through Monrovia yesterday, and took a look at the Maintenance Facility site.
The entire site was cleared *except* for the 3M building. Their lights were on, indicating the building has not yet been vacated. I wonder when they plan to leave, so that the building can be razed.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Dec 31, 2012 15:54:43 GMT -8
Drove through Monrovia yesterday, and took a look at the Maintenance Facility site. The entire site was cleared *except* for the 3M building. Their lights were on, indicating the building has not yet been vacated. I wonder when they plan to leave, so that the building can be razed. The December 2010 SEIR shows two possible site configurations for the M&O facility. One of them leaves the 3M building in place. Here is some later info from a July 2011 board meeting: Mr. Balian provided the report. Mr. Balian indicated that the proposed 3M Agreement would allow for certain use and alternations to the 3M site which have been discussed by both parties. Mr. Balian indicated that the modifications were necessary due to Metro operational needs for the M&O facility. Chairman Tessitor requested if there were any additional speakers noting that Mr. Silverstein previously spoke on this item, seeing and hearing none, Chairman Tessitor closed public comment. Chairman Tessitor requested a motion to approve Approval of Use and Improvement Agreement with 3M Company. Board Member Hanks made a motion to approve the item. Board Member Pedroza seconded the motion which was then approved unanimouslyHere is the site layout:
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Dec 31, 2012 16:29:36 GMT -8
I took a hike up the bike trail to the SGR Bridge today. No work has started yet despite the December 3rd construction start notice.
RT
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 1, 2013 19:23:32 GMT -8
The 3-M building will stay in service; apparently some of the activities there are protected by a "grandfather clause" that would make it difficult to relocate the operation. Regarding the San Gabriel River bridge--as I recall serious work is expected to start in March. Up until fairly recently, the bridge has been used for bringing in track materials, which are stored west of the river adjacent to the former location of the ATSF Butler siding.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jan 2, 2013 15:05:20 GMT -8
Thanks for the info on 3M. (I either didn't know that information, or I did but forgot. LOL) I am very anxious to see some track laying soon. It's nice that the basket bridge is done, but for now it is a "bridge to nowhere". The FEIR for this project was certified over 5 years ago, in 2007. That's a long time. While I readily acknowledge all the obstacles and milestones overcome since 2007, this project is really starting to get annoying. In fact, it's like "Chinese water torture". I wanna see, fairly soon: - New track construction
- Station construction
- Construction of three major grade-separations (SG River bridge, Huntington Drive crossing in Arcadia, Foothill Blvd crossing in Azusa)
- M&O Facility construction
- Reconfiguration of Duarte Rd @ Mountain Avenue
- Crossing enhancements.
That's a lot to do, with less than 3 years until the scheduled opening. So they need to pick up the pace.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 2, 2013 19:41:14 GMT -8
Regarding the pace of construction: Folks up in the Bay Area, and especially in downtown San Francisco had the same feeling 40-some years ago during the BART project. There were a lot of "Didn't the Pharaohs of Egypt get their Pyramids built faster than this?" comments back then. I suspect that by this time next year, we'll see a lot of results. Projects like this take a lot of prior planning--paper and hard-drive files are a lot easier to revise than concrete and steel, and fitting construction into built up areas is much harder than building through a wilderness.
|
|
|
Post by TransportationZ on Jan 2, 2013 20:57:51 GMT -8
Regarding the pace of construction: Folks up in the Bay Area, and especially in downtown San Francisco had the same feeling 40-some years ago during the BART project. There were a lot of "Didn't the Pharaohs of Egypt get their Pyramids built faster than this?" comments back then. I suspect that by this time next year, we'll see a lot of results. Projects like this take a lot of prior planning--paper and hard-drive files are a lot easier to revise than concrete and steel, and fitting construction into built up areas is much harder than building through a wilderness. The frustrating part is that Expo Phase 2 is coming along at a much faster pace, and there are allot more variables and complicated things that can go wrong with phase 2. This extension is 100% on private ROW with much of it in really low density areas. There's not even any OCS base structures yet. it's literally grade, lay tracks, add a few 300 foot slabs of concretes called stations, done. No street widening, no large utility relocation, no complicated signals or NIMBYs. Even the main bridge of this project is done. To say that it's frustrating to see no construction other than the bridge is an understatement.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 3, 2013 0:18:38 GMT -8
Upcoming challenges: Bridge across Huntington Drive in Arcadia, crosses diagonally, with 2nd Ave. running north and south through the site. Bridge across the San Gabriel River--US Army Corps of Engineers and several other government entities involved. Relocating the BNSF line to serve Miller-Coors. Retaining walls will be needed for the right of way between IFS bridge and Arcadia station, from Huntington Dr. to the Monrovia station and in part of Azusa. Bridges over Foothill Blvd in Azusa for light rail and BNSF will be a big project. There will be a major reconfiguration of the intersection of Mountain Ave. and Duarte Rd., with the associated grade crossing at the Monrovia-Duarte boundary. Note that in some places where sidings were removed back around 1970, there is room for double track without widening the right of way.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jan 3, 2013 6:58:01 GMT -8
Upcoming challenges: Bridge across Huntington Drive in Arcadia, crosses diagonally, with 2nd Ave. running north and south through the site. Bridge across the San Gabriel River--US Army Corps of Engineers and several other government entities involved. Relocating the BNSF line to serve Miller-Coors. Retaining walls will be needed for the right of way between IFS bridge and Arcadia station, from Huntington Dr. to the Monrovia station and in part of Azusa. Bridges over Foothill Blvd in Azusa for light rail and BNSF will be a big project. There will be a major reconfiguration of the intersection of Mountain Ave. and Duarte Rd., with the associated grade crossing at the Monrovia-Duarte boundary. Note that in some places where sidings were removed back around 1970, there is room for double track without widening the right of way. Bob, Are the retaining walls part of the work being started on January 7th to put the bridge in over Colorado Blvd? I'm wondering because I see no mention of the work required to grade separate Santa Anita Bl (lowering) from the tracks (bridge). That is going to take a bit of work. I haven't seen the design, but I would imagine there would be an MSE ramp on both side of Santa Anita leading to the bridge over Santa Anita. Is that right? RT
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jan 3, 2013 8:02:29 GMT -8
I do know that part of the delay was waiting for the funding agreement with Metro. No property negotiations, design, or construction could start until that deal was finalized. That ate up 2.5 years.
Then there were the Brokate lawsuits. That added another year.
It's just a shame because this project doesnt have nearly the wrinkles/complications that other projects have. Everybody said private ROW = quick and easy project. Now its looking like it will open in 2016, 9 years after FEIR approval. Compare that to other projects, this is pretty slow.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jan 3, 2013 12:21:02 GMT -8
Answered my own question, per the Arcadia Patch: arcadia.patch.com/articles/colorado-street-bridge-work-beginsApparently the Colorado, Santa Anita and Huntington bridges will be built sequentially if you take the story literally... "Once the bridge is complete, crews will move onto the Santa Anita and Huntington bridges."RT
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 3, 2013 23:20:29 GMT -8
Regarding the apparent slowness of progress on the GLFE--the Perris Valley Metrolink line was supposed to be running by 2010. If all goes well, construction may start in March. Bear in mind that Metrolink doesn't have any bridges to build or trolley wire to erect and energize (the only trolley wire will be on Orange Empire's extension to the historic Perris depot).
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 4, 2013 10:30:51 GMT -8
I wouldn't claim that the Foothill extension is moving too slow -- I bet it will be still a lot faster than Expo Phase 1, which took forever and it's still not complete with its malfunctioning ATP and improperly built tracks at the junction, along with many other unfinished parts. Yes, the line is open, but it's still not finished.
Saying that FEIR was done a long time ago means little. There was no funding for Foothill until Measure R. Expo Phase 2 was funded years before that. In fact, I don't know how they got away with doing an EIR without having funding for the project -- normally it's not legal to do so.
Foothill Authority is also always years ahead of themselves, which is highly misleading the public. It's part of their extremely aggressive marketing campaign. They always sell the project with great excitement and make public believe that it will open in 2013.
I don't know if Foothill is moving too slow but I doubt it. If it opens in 2016, it will be fast to say the least. 2015 is very unrealistic for it to open, to say the least.
Expo Phase 2 won't open until the second half of 2015 and even that is highly optimistic.
Last but not least, neither project can open before the new Kinki Sharyo LRVs arrive. Currently they don't even have enough LRVs for Expo Phase 1, let alone new projects.
We know the Kinki Sharyo LRVs will arrive in several batches. It's not certain if the first batch will arrive in 2015 for Expo Phase 2 to open that year. What is 100% certain is that the first batch won't be enough for both Expo Phase 2 and Foothill at the same time. This makes a 2015 opening for Foothill impossible and a 2016 opening an uncertainty. Foothill may be delayed as late as 2017 to wait until the new LRVs arrive. Just realistically speaking...
I think far more important thing for these projects is to be done right rather than fast. I would be a lot happier if Expo Phase 1 opened in 2015 along with Expo Phase 2 but done right, instead of being so operationally problematic.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Jan 4, 2013 14:08:23 GMT -8
I think far more important thing for these projects is to be done right rather than fast. I would be a lot happier if Expo Phase 1 opened in 2015 along with Expo Phase 2 but done right, instead of being so operationally problematic. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. In other words, I think they largely needed the line to get up and running to work on these issues to some degree. Of course, they could have run test cars for the last year and continue to do so for the next year or two to get to the same point, but that would be a waste. It took a few years for the Gold Line to speed up after it opened. I'll be meeting a friend in Culver City tonight and riding Expo Downtown for the Laker-Clipper game, so I am glad it is up and running in whatever form. The ridership to date may be a little light (although it is actually quite good on a per mile basis as others have pointed out), but it is still a useful line for quite a few people.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 4, 2013 15:30:40 GMT -8
I think far more important thing for these projects is to be done right rather than fast. I would be a lot happier if Expo Phase 1 opened in 2015 along with Expo Phase 2 but done right, instead of being so operationally problematic. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. In other words, I think they largely needed the line to get up and running to work on these issues to some degree. Of course, they could have run test cars for the last year and continue to do so for the next year or two to get to the same point, but that would be a waste. It took a few years for the Gold Line to speed up after it opened. I'll be meeting a friend in Culver City tonight and riding Expo Downtown for the Laker-Clipper game, so I am glad it is up and running in whatever form. The ridership to date may be a little light (although it is actually quite good on a per mile basis as others have pointed out), but it is still a useful line for quite a few people. I don't really mean that they should have kept testing it a lot longer. What I meant was that the more important thing is to build a good line, rather than to build a line. Yes, building fast and well are probably not mutually exclusive. I am a little worried that Parsons is designing Expo Phase 2 as well, who had previously messed up Expo Phase 1. My worry on the Expo Line is that the choice riders seem to be decreasing and the new riders seem to be mostly switching from the buses.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Jan 4, 2013 15:40:28 GMT -8
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. In other words, I think they largely needed the line to get up and running to work on these issues to some degree. Of course, they could have run test cars for the last year and continue to do so for the next year or two to get to the same point, but that would be a waste. It took a few years for the Gold Line to speed up after it opened. I'll be meeting a friend in Culver City tonight and riding Expo Downtown for the Laker-Clipper game, so I am glad it is up and running in whatever form. The ridership to date may be a little light (although it is actually quite good on a per mile basis as others have pointed out), but it is still a useful line for quite a few people. I don't really mean that they should have kept testing it a lot longer. What I meant was that the more important thing is to build a good line, rather than to build a line. Yes, building fast and well are probably not mutually exclusive. I am a little worried that Parsons is designing Expo Phase 2 as well, who had previously messed up Expo Phase 1. My worry on the Expo Line is that the choice riders seem to be decreasing and the new riders seem to be mostly switching from the buses. I do agree it has been a lost opportunity to pick up choice riders. The line is just too slow to pick them up in my opinion. Reliability problems haven't helped, but I don't think that the reliability has been too bad lately, but it probably rubbed some people the wrong way initially who went back to their cars. If they can shave a few minutes off the run times, I think we can get to 30k riders, but not much more. This line really needs Phase II, Crenshaw, and the Regional Connector to shine.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 7, 2013 1:16:25 GMT -8
Last Friday the big yellow machines were busy rearranging the landscape for the Gold Line Operations Campus in Monrovia. Soldier piles are already in place for the retaining wall on the north side of the property. In other news, construction of the Colorado Blvd bridge in Arcadia will be starting in the next few days.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 7, 2013 1:21:07 GMT -8
This is looking northwest from the southeast corner of the GLOC. Trains will enter and leave the facility here.
|
|
|
Post by transitfan on Jan 7, 2013 7:00:19 GMT -8
Nice pics, Bob. Wonder what the internal MTA division number for this yard will be. If they stay in sequence, should be Division 23 (there was a location 23 waaayy back in the RTD days (before my time in L. A.), which was the Toberman lot near the junction of the Harbor and Santa Monica freeways, which was used for midday storage of express buses, but I think that MTA no longer owns it, and therefore the number is available for re-use).
|
|
|
Post by TransportationZ on Jan 7, 2013 22:59:10 GMT -8
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. In other words, I think they largely needed the line to get up and running to work on these issues to some degree. Of course, they could have run test cars for the last year and continue to do so for the next year or two to get to the same point, but that would be a waste. It took a few years for the Gold Line to speed up after it opened. I'll be meeting a friend in Culver City tonight and riding Expo Downtown for the Laker-Clipper game, so I am glad it is up and running in whatever form. The ridership to date may be a little light (although it is actually quite good on a per mile basis as others have pointed out), but it is still a useful line for quite a few people. I don't really mean that they should have kept testing it a lot longer. What I meant was that the more important thing is to build a good line, rather than to build a line. Yes, building fast and well are probably not mutually exclusive. I am a little worried that Parsons is designing Expo Phase 2 as well, who had previously messed up Expo Phase 1. My worry on the Expo Line is that the choice riders seem to be decreasing and the new riders seem to be mostly switching from the buses. I have to agree, since choice riders always look at public transportation with a magnifying glass. One hiccup like a train or bus being late and it's back to the cars, even though when I give them a list of flaws and hiccups that cars have, they act like it doesn't exist. Cars really give a false sense of freedom. In my opinion, the Foothill Gold Line will probably be allot of 187 and various other foothill transit riders.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 10, 2013 14:40:36 GMT -8
Having ridden the present Gold Line outbound around 4:30 PM, and seeing the train outrun the freeway traffic, even the cars and buses in the HOV lane, I suspect quite a few motorists will be parking the car in Azusa to "travel better electrically."
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 10, 2013 14:57:08 GMT -8
The new year is seeing activity from one end of the line to the other: Work has started on the Colorado Blvd. bridge, this is expected to take about four months. When that is done, the next location will be the nearby Santa Anita Ave. grade separation, which is expected to take about six months. No report on the Huntington Dr./historic route 66 structure--that's going to be a real engineering challenge. Out in Azusa, work on relocating the BNSF track is starting and this should be done by the end of this year. In Duarte, rebuilding the Highland Ave. grade crossing has started. Major grading for the Operations Campus in Monrovia is well along. The San Gabriel River bridge project is expected to start in March. On the "behind the scenes" front, Alan G. Wapner, of the Ontario City Council has been added to the Board of Directors to represent the San Bernardino Association of Governments, recognizing the plan to extend Phase 2B to Montclair, and eventually to provide service to Ontario Airport.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 10, 2013 17:55:29 GMT -8
This is the Highland Ave. crossing, just east of the future Duarte Station. One of the soon-to-be removed tracks was the Santa Fe main line, the other was for Butler Siding, where Santa Fe used to spot "outfit cars" for construction projects.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 10, 2013 18:04:16 GMT -8
This crew was installing conduit for underground electrical systems west of Highland Ave. in Duarte. Note the rocks, something which Duarte has plenty of. 50 years ago, there were houses built of fieldstone in this area, which gave the neighborhood the name of "Rocktown".
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jan 11, 2013 8:06:46 GMT -8
Thanks for all the info Bob! The news, photos and background stories you post are a big help. It's good to see big progress coming in 2013.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 11, 2013 18:37:16 GMT -8
You're welcome. As someone who saw the Pacific Electric tracks removed from Monrovia 61 years ago (check the PERYHS website and enter Monrovia in the search box), it's a major thrill to see GLFE construction gathering momentum.
|
|
|
Post by roadtrainer on Jan 16, 2013 19:02:52 GMT -8
Hey Bob: Who is the contractor for the GLFE? has anyone ever heard of them before? What kind of track record do they have? and can we expect them to move as quickly as Skanska? Sincerely The Roadtrainer
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jan 17, 2013 9:18:00 GMT -8
The contactor is Kiewit-Parsons: Breaking News! Contractor cleared for construction!From I Will Ride: The Construction Authority has issued a Full Notice to Proceed (NTP) to Kiewit Parsons Joint Venture for the Pasadena to Azusa Alignment design-build project.
Over the last couple of months Kiewit Parsons has been working under an Interim NTP, limiting their work to design and pre-construction activities. During that time, the Authority has been able to meet the two conditions holding back full funding for the project by our funding agreement with Metro – (1) BNSF’s abandonment of the rail right-of-way west of Irwindale and (2) full control of more than 50% of the land needed for the project’s maintenance and operations facility. Both conditions were met in the first few months of 2012.
Now, with Full NTP in hand, Kiewit Parsons Joint Venture is authorized to work on all elements of the project, and anticipates an on-time construction completion in late 2015. Major construction is planned to begin this Fall.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 17, 2013 13:13:54 GMT -8
The contactor is Kiewit-Parsons: Breaking News! Contractor cleared for construction!From I Will Ride: The Construction Authority has issued a Full Notice to Proceed (NTP) to Kiewit Parsons Joint Venture for the Pasadena to Azusa Alignment design-build project.
Over the last couple of months Kiewit Parsons has been working under an Interim NTP, limiting their work to design and pre-construction activities. During that time, the Authority has been able to meet the two conditions holding back full funding for the project by our funding agreement with Metro – (1) BNSF’s abandonment of the rail right-of-way west of Irwindale and (2) full control of more than 50% of the land needed for the project’s maintenance and operations facility. Both conditions were met in the first few months of 2012.
Now, with Full NTP in hand, Kiewit Parsons Joint Venture is authorized to work on all elements of the project, and anticipates an on-time construction completion in late 2015. Major construction is planned to begin this Fall. Oops, Parsons was also part of the Expo Phase 1 contractor -- Flatiron/Fluor/Parsons. They are also the ones who designed the Expo - Blue junction unbelievably with the incorrect track gauge. While being obviously incompetent, they are also a subcontractor for the design of Expo Phase 2. So, there is really no escape from them in LA.
|
|