|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 12, 2018 16:12:20 GMT -8
If Little Tokyo doesn't want the line (that's their prerogative), I am equally happy with another line cutting into Downtown proper.
For me, the ideal solution is an east-west line connecting Alameda to 7th/Metro Center, with a stop near Broadway or Spring. This line would have easy access to all existing lines (at 7th/MC), while expanding the coverage area to the southern Historic Core (which currently lacks a Metro station).
8th Street might be ideal. The new station near 8th/Spring would serve all the new development near the Ace Hotel and the western edge of the Fashion District. And as a bonus, the alignment would avoid the need to cross the Red Line (which would be a challenge).
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Feb 12, 2018 16:46:09 GMT -8
I think that getting more capacity to union station s a key issue. Red and purple line trains are already busy. Add in HSR and upgraded metrolink lines and the planned services fall we’ll short of what’s needed. Even assuming red and purple are a combined 3-4 min, it may still be tight. An extra 12 tph would help.
|
|
|
|
Post by joemagruder on Feb 12, 2018 21:08:11 GMT -8
How is Little Tokyo's opposition gauged? A poll? Three people complaining at a meeting?
I would think the Union Station vs. Financial District question should be decided based on which route would maximize the number of single seat rides.
|
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Feb 12, 2018 23:24:08 GMT -8
Interesting, if this line doesn’t go to union station, that opens up the possibility of becoming a continuous line with the downtown to Glendale yellow line that is supposed to bisect Glendale.
|
|
|
|
Post by usmc1401 on Feb 13, 2018 8:54:15 GMT -8
Metro just received a a grant. From Rail Way Age.
$58.4 million to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority for several projects including:
* $23.941 million for the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor
* $19.745 million for the Green Line Extension (Redondo Beach-Torrance)
* $14.8 million for the Willowbrook/Rosa Parks Station Mezzanine Improvements project
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 13, 2018 9:08:46 GMT -8
Metro just received a a grant. From Rail Way Age. $58.4 million to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority for several projects including: * $23.941 million for the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor * $19.745 million for the Green Line Extension (Redondo Beach-Torrance) * $14.8 million for the Willowbrook/Rosa Parks Station Mezzanine Improvements project That's great news! In my opinion, the Lower Historic Core (Broadway/Spring/Main between 7th and Olympic) *needs* a station. It would open up a whole new part of Downtown LA, including eastern South Park and western Fashion District, to subway service. I actually think building that station is more important than building another station in the Financial District. (And I say that as someone who works in that area.) Of course the line does need to connect to the existing system somehow. Another priority, mentioned earlier, is positioning the new line to possibly connect to a future line, such as a Glendale Line. |
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Feb 13, 2018 12:16:18 GMT -8
If we don’t have to force all transfers through union station then
The best way to connect to the existing system is if during the upcoming demo and rebuild of Pershing square parking structure and park they built a second station above the red line Pershing square station thus allowing transfers (and the rebuilt parking and park above the bilevel station.
The line could then proceed north west through downtown (so long as it avoids the fourth street tunnel whose footings preclude any subterranean work beneath it), possibly building another infill transfer station at the regional connectors abandoned station location.
South east of Pershing square you could have a station or two for those parts of downtown suggested above.
I wonder if union station is being discarded possibly because ridership surveys and studies indicate that people who would use the Santa Ana line would all abandon the Santa Ana line en masse every work day to transfer to the blue line to get to the job centers,
Probably, potential riders have no intention of riding to the end of the line, then Transferring to the subway, then backtracking into the job centers via the red and purple line.
(I’m sure it was a shock to transit planners that riders will always chose the route they believe to be he shortest and fastest, instead of choosing a longer and slower and more logistically complicated transit planner approved union station route)
If so, the daily possibility of 40,000 riders trying to transfer onto the blue line to get to the job centers is making the transit planners realize they don’t have the capacity to handle that transfer loads on the blue line.
|
|
|
|
Post by bzzzt on Feb 13, 2018 13:37:55 GMT -8
>> Apparently there is now strong resistence from Downtown LA stakeholders to allow elevated line down Alameda thru Little Tokyo to Union Station.
Last time I checked, there were 4 alignments being considered, and only some of them were elevated Alameda. One or two others were underground underneath the Arts District (I think Alameda/Center was one of them), so I would say that yes there was resistance to elevated Alameda, but it also was a preference to underground Arts District.
This is the first serious proposal to run a line across Skid Row. I think downtown needs another east-west line by now - glad to see them considering it. I'd like to see a station in City West as well. In my perfect bubble world, I'd have stations at 5th between Broadway and Hill, 5th between Flower and Fig, and 6th between Bixel and Lucas.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Feb 13, 2018 19:59:57 GMT -8
I approve of changing the alignment to aim for the downtown core, if there are stations both at Pershing square and at the Regional Connector (most likely at the Bunker Hill station). However, I'm concerned that this is being studied in isolation. This would be a third core subway though downtown, and it is the one remaining good alignment that can meet both existing tunnels at good transfer stations. It was a mistake to build the Regional Connector tunnels with only two tracks, to be shared by two light rail lines. This new tunnel would lend itself for branches towards Santa Monica Blvd and Glendale Blvd to the north, and Huntington Park / South Gate to the southeast. Will two tracks be enough? Shouldn't the branches be planned now? This is why Metro needs to start planning a whole rail network for the long-run, rather than just focusing on the currently funded projects:  I do like how this new tunnel would make it easy to start planning a rail line from West Hollywood to Downtown LA along Santa Monica Blvd / Sunset Blvd / Glendale Blvd. This would also provide a good transfer option for people coming from the Valley on the Red line, making it easier to change the route at Wilshire/Vermont to continue south. |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Feb 14, 2018 1:44:08 GMT -8
>> Apparently there is now strong resistence from Downtown LA stakeholders to allow elevated line down Alameda thru Little Tokyo to Union Station. Last time I checked, there were 4 alignments being considered, and only some of them were elevated Alameda. One or two others were underground underneath the Arts District (I think Alameda/Center was one of them), so I would say that yes there was resistance to elevated Alameda, but it also was a preference to underground Arts District. This is the first serious proposal to run a line across Skid Row. I think downtown needs another east-west line by now - glad to see them considering it. I'd like to see a station in City West as well. In my perfect bubble world, I'd have stations at 5th between Broadway and Hill, 5th between Flower and Fig, and 6th between Bixel and Lucas. The 4 alignments were Pacific/Alameda, 2) Pacific/Vignes, 3) Alameda, and 4) Alameda/Vignes Pacific/Alameda was underground at Arts District, elevated on Alameda through Little Tokyo to Union Station. Pacific/Vignes was underground at Arts District, elevated (but not on Alameda) as it passes by Little Tokyo to Union Station. Alameda was elevated on Alameda from Olympic/Alameda through Little Tokyo to Union Station. Alameda/Vignes was elevated on Alameda from Olympic/Alameda, underground at Arts District, elevated (but not on Alameda) as it passes by Little Tokyo to Union Station. metro.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=5113222&GUID=A1677E3F-56CF-4528-8229-5BB05DC1B61DHow is Little Tokyo's opposition gauged? A poll? Three people complaining at a meeting? I would think the Union Station vs. Financial District question should be decided based on which route would maximize the number of single seat rides. 400 comments received from Little Tokyo stakeholders during the DEIS/DEIR process: |
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Feb 15, 2018 10:18:42 GMT -8
 The Magenta colored dashed line is the West Santa Ana Corridor connecting to a 6th Street/Arts District terminal because what is the point of routing it through DTLA where a transfer to the Red/Purple Lines will be needed anyways why not save some $$$ and create the connection from the start. The Dark Blue dashed line is a tunnel or elevated via 11th or 12th Streets to replace the Washington Blvd street running Blue Line and will serve South Park/LA Live through the Fashion District where it connects back to the Blue Line Right of Way and the Washington Blvd Station and provide the needed capacity and reliability upgrades so many posters on here talk about for so long as recently as July when the Washington/Flower junction conversation reoccurred. If routed smartly this can be a single route from South Park to Arts District and then (in future) up to Union Station to tie into the existing Gold Line to Azusa tracks so that longer distance Foothill Gold Line trains can end in DTLA. |
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Feb 15, 2018 12:00:19 GMT -8
Based on the above, what if the Santa Ana branch was a continuation of the HRT red and purple lines?
|
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Feb 15, 2018 14:18:54 GMT -8
Based on the above, what if the Santa Ana branch was a continuation of the HRT red and purple lines? A possiblity |
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Feb 15, 2018 21:05:13 GMT -8
Based on the above, what if the Santa Ana branch was a continuation of the HRT red and purple lines? This seems unlikely. The HRT lines use third rail, which is not compatible with at-grade street crossings or surface stations. |
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Feb 16, 2018 14:14:12 GMT -8
Yeah but no one wants at grade rail anymore, so if it’s all gonna be subterranean anyway ...
|
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Feb 16, 2018 14:41:55 GMT -8
Based on the above, what if the Santa Ana branch was a continuation of the HRT red and purple lines? This seems unlikely. The HRT lines use third rail, which is not compatible with at-grade street crossings or surface stations. Or mostly elevated and the crossings that could be on the surface will be very, very minor crossings. There are at-grade third rail systems in the US mostly in Chicago and New York with the Long Island Railroad. |
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 2, 2018 13:56:24 GMT -8
Metro has scheduled three community meetings to take public comment on he new potential downtown route
|
|
|
|
Post by Joe Magruder on Mar 3, 2018 7:12:58 GMT -8
I think the California PUC forbid third rails in situations where access was possible, i.e., where the r/w was not completely fenced, sometime in the 1940s. This led to the abandonment of the Sacramento Northern third rail.
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 5, 2018 12:25:11 GMT -8
For the WSA Branch, from what I've read, they are only considering putting it below-grade in Downtown L.A., where at-grade is not at all feasible.
Personally, I think they would only underground the line if it heads (a) west from Alameda into the Central City, or (b) northeast from Alameda toward the Arts District. Below-grade would be cost-prohibitive anywhere else.
Along Alameda, the discussion has been to build it above-grade. South of downtown, they are looking at mostly at-grade running in the existing ROW, with exceptions for certain busy street crossings.
|
|
|
|
Post by tramfan on Mar 10, 2018 10:02:49 GMT -8
Third rail and mixed catenary are also a possibility; in Amsteram (the Netheerlands) there's a LTR line that uses the subway HRT tracks to the Central Station. There's a station before it goes underground where it engages the third rail and retracts the overhead connector. From there it basically becomes an HRT line. It reverses this on the way back. The LTR cars look very similar to the Metro's older Nippon Sharyo cars.
|
|
|
|
Post by fissure on Mar 14, 2018 9:36:21 GMT -8
I went to the afternoon meeting in Little Tokyo on Monday. The "transit core" routes they showed were more fleshed-out and showed a stop on Alameda south of 7th, a curve onto 7th and over to 8th (diagonal, under buildings), a stop at 8th/Los Angeles, and then a split to either Broadway/4th to connect to Pershing Square or 8th/Flower to connect to Metro Center. I'm generally in favor of straighter routes, so I suggested using 9th instead. This skips the Arts District station, but 9th/Central is only about half a mile from the station location they had and it would be a lot faster.
|
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 14, 2018 9:56:12 GMT -8
That’s troubling they’re not trying to go to the infill station at fifth and flower
|
|
|
|
Post by exporider on Mar 14, 2018 10:32:32 GMT -8
That’s troubling they’re not trying to go to the infill station at fifth and flower Are they actually building space for "the infill station at fifth and flower" into the Regional Connector? I had heard (2-3 years ago) that they decided against that in order to save $$$. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 14, 2018 16:33:38 GMT -8
I went to the afternoon meeting in Little Tokyo on Monday. The "transit core" routes they showed were more fleshed-out and showed a stop on Alameda south of 7th, a curve onto 7th and over to 8th (diagonal, under buildings), a stop at 8th/Los Angeles, and then a split to either Broadway/4th to connect to Pershing Square or 8th/Flower to connect to Metro Center. I'm generally in favor of straighter routes, so I suggested using 9th instead. This skips the Arts District station, but 9th/Central is only about half a mile from the station location they had and it would be a lot faster.
I'm a huge fan of a station in the lower Historic Core or Financial District. Ideally somewhere between 7th and 9th, and between Broadway and Main. But 8th/Los Angeles is pretty close, I could live with it.
As for the two terminal routes (to 8th/Flower, and to 4th/Broadway), those are both excellent options. I like that they both allow for future extensions. In particular, the second option (up Broadway) sets Metro up for a future extension north, to Burbank/Glendale. But of course, that second option doesn't connect to the Expo-to-Eastside Line: a rider would have to either do a transfer via Red/Purple through 7th/Metro, or walk two blocks on Broadway between stations.
For those who haven't attended a community meeting yet, five were scheduled (three of them already completed):
- Mon 12 MAR, 3 PM - Little Tokyo
- Mon 12 MAR, 6 PM - Little Tokyo
- Tue 13 MAR, 6 PM - Artesia
- Sat 17 MAR, 10 AM - Bell
- Mon 19 MAR, 6 PM - Downey
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 14, 2018 19:32:41 GMT -8
There’s also a video of the little Tokyo meeting online linked on the WSA metro page. You can also vote/comment without attending a meeting.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Mar 15, 2018 19:44:44 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Mar 21, 2018 9:05:43 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Apr 25, 2018 8:45:32 GMT -8
FYI another round of three meetings has been scheduled: - Mon 30 APR, 3 PM - Downtown L.A. (Metro HQ)
- Mon 30 APR, 6 PM - Downtown L.A. (Metro HQ)
- Thur 3 MAY, 6 PM - Paramount
More detailed information can be found here. |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on May 2, 2018 17:07:03 GMT -8
Streetblog has a summary on the options on the table: la.streetsblog.org/2018/05/01/metro-west-santa-ana-branch-rail-preferred-routes-to-go-to-metro-board-this-month/Really, when you look at this, it is clear option G is the best. It gets people to where the jobs are in DTLA, and has potential for easy transfers to both Red/Purple and Blue/Expo lines. Option E gets you near Union Station but requires back track to the center of the DTLA. Also E only gets near Union Station not to Union Station... it is going to be a disaster trying to transfer there. Option F requires double transfer to get to Expo/Eastside line, which is a non-starter in my opinion. Option H must be an inside joke. |
|
|
|
Post by andert on May 3, 2018 6:53:20 GMT -8
I wonder if option G would be designed to allow for a future extension up Alvarado to Echo Park/Silver Lake/Atwater/Glendale/Burbank. That line has always seemed like such a no-brainer to me.
|
|
