Addendum to Crenshaw Corridor scoping meeting
Contributed by Wad on October 2nd, 2009 at 4:33 am
BRT option for Crenshaw Corridor Light rail option for Crenshaw Corridor
The Crenshaw Corridor question comes down to: bus rapid transit, left, or light rail?
Maps by Metro
I looked through the CD-ROM of supporting documents for the Crenshaw Corridor. They are the electronic versions of the binder photographed at Wednesday’s meeting. The study is more than two reams, coming in at more than 1,100 pages. The file size is 90 megs. The engineering drawings are 138 pages, but are graphically intensive. It would be far too time-consuming to reproduce them here. Sharing them on Google may exhaust the bandwidth limitation of accounts.
You can probably find most of the supporting PDFs on Metro’s project page. You can also go to one of the remaining meetings or request more information from project manager Roderick Diaz. His mail contact information:
Roderick Diaz, project manager
Metro, One Gateway Plaza, Mail Stop 99-22-3
Los Angeles, Ca. 90012
Pedestrian View Of Los Angeles
More content as you stroll down on the right side
2. Blog List and Press Releases
3. My Blog List
4. Rail Lines: Existing, Under Construction and Under Consideration
5. Share It
6. Search This Blog
7. Followers
8. About Me
9. Feedjit Live Traffic Feed
Friday, October 2, 2009
The Crenshaw Corridor question comes down to: bus rapid transit, left, or light rail? (Source: MetroRiderLA)
Gold Line Testing Begins Sunday (Source: Eastern Group Publications)
Gold Line Testing Begins Sunday
By EGP News Service
Metro will begin the pre-revenue testing phase before the opening of the six-mile extension of the Metro Gold Line to East Los Angeles, which is expected this fall.
The pre-revenue light rail train testing is designed to simulate revenue service operations on the new segment, synchronizing it with the service already provided between Union Station and Sierra Madre Villa Station in East Pasadena.
The purpose of pre-revenue testing, which could last more than a month, is to familiarize Metro train operators and train control staff with simulated service. Since there will be many more test trains on the new alignment, stretching from Union Station through Little Tokyo and the downtown Arts District, Boyle Heights and East Los Angeles, Metro officials are urging the public to be alert and obey all safety warning devices and signage.
Has Metro Lost Its Train of Thought? (Source: CityWatch)
Moving LA
By Ken Alpern
Has Metro Lost Its Train of Thought?
In the aftermath of Proposition R and a more transit-friendly federal governmental shift, Metro is now wrestling with several challenges that will determine how successful this new burst of transportation spending will be for LA County. Now, more than ever, Metro is enabled by funding and opportunity and must do the right thing by its taxpaying constituents.
Challenge #1:
The first big news item that many readers are probably aware of is the decision of Metro to proceed forward with a huge train-building contract with Ansaldobreda…a train-building firm from Italy that ought to rename itself as Bait-and-Switch-a because of its horrific track record of making promises and building trains, and then not coming through either with the promises or trains built to proper specifications.
Currently, there are a slew of trains built for Metro that are thousands of pounds overweight (maybe Ansaldobreda thought they’d be a better fit for us overweight Americans?) and which must be reconstructed to avoid wearing down our light rail systems.
However, Ansaldobreda also has promised a hefty line of credit and money to make up for its past boo-boos and to correctly build the 100 new trains needed by Metro. Although it’s not supposed to influence the Metro Board vote also promised to build a large train-building plant in L.A. that could be a source of jobs and economic benefit to the county.
Still, this vote went against repeated and public opposition by past CEO Roger Snoble and current CEO Art Leahy, and the final 8-3 vote had as opponents Santa Monica Councilmember Pam O’Connor, County Supervisor Mike Antonovich and Lakewood City Councilmember Diane DuBois. No political or ideological or geographic bloc there, and methinks their vote was based on good economics and policies.
I recognize that Mayor Villaraigosa is ambitious and sincere about establishing LA as a source of “green jobs”, and I do hope he’s going to follow through on the very strict set of financial requirements that Ansaldobreda has been held to. This could either be a great opportunity or a horrible boondoggle for LA.
To the Mayor and the others who voted for Ansaldobreda, I hope you’re tough on them and demand peer review and outright transparency with the firm with whom CEO Leahy expressed so many concerns. To Ansaldobreda, I wish you the best of luck as you attempt to turn over a new leaf...but we’re WATCHING you!
Challenge #2:
The second big news item that many readers might be aware of is the decision of Metro to proceed forward with two projects for potential federal funding: the Downtown Light Rail Connector and the Wilshire Subway.
The Connector links all four current and future light rail projects that access downtown to each other: the Blue, Expo, Pasadena Gold and Eastside Gold Lines, as well as establishing a link to Bunker Hill and Downtown L.A. in locations that the Red Line Subway doesn’t access very well. The Wilshire Subway will proceed west to the Fairfax District, Century City, Westwood and the 405 (maybe even Santa Monica someday).
Contrary to popular thinking, the federal government is frightfully strict about cost-effectiveness for rail lines (particularly during the last presidential administration), and will demand they be cheap and with high ridership. The Wilshire Subway and Downtown Light Rail Connector are projected to have a whole lotta riders per dollar and mile of rail, so they’re our best bet for the competitive federal process.
Other sorely-needed Metro priorities include the Expo, Crenshaw and Foothill Gold Lines, but these either have too-low projected ridership or they’re too expensive for federal funding (one of the reasons why Metro is always trying to cut corners and build them on the cheap with insufficient parking and fewer grade-separations than otherwise desired by the general public).
Still, Metro has been trying to figure out its Long Range Transportation Plan, which is an ambitious one that includes Expo, Crenshaw, Foothill Gold, the Downtown Connector and the Wilshire Subway in the next 5-10 years—and its decision to fund the first three with local/state dollars and the last two with local/federal dollars might actually get the job done.
It was Metro staff that recommended pursuing federal dollars for the Subway and Connector, and I’m glad that the Metro Board followed their advice. Now if only the state could do its part…
Challenge #3:
After many years of awaiting the first Mid-City phase of the Expo Line to Culver City in 2010, we now learn that the best we can hope for is to have the line reach Crenshaw in 2010 and Culver City in 2011. It’s indeed possible that it won’t reach Culver City until 2012.
While it’s not the end of the world to have construction projects be late (as those of us next to the 405 widening project can truly attest), but it’s the reasons why the Expo Line is late that get us on edge—particularly when we set up an Expo Line Authority to expedite its construction.
Utility replacement and technical problems (not helped by DWP delays) are understandable slow-downs that everyone should recognize. The Jefferson undercrossing near USC and the bridgework at La Brea and La Cienega reveal how tough (and expensive!) it can be to grade-separate light rail.
Yet incompetence, greediness, and delays by the contractors are ones that should have been foreseen by otherwise-respected veteran Rick Thorpe (Expo Authority CEO) and the assigned Boardmembers who oversee this process. Labor and materials are now amazingly cheap in today’s economic slowdown, and any “come to Jesus” talks with, or replacement of, the contractors should have occurred much sooner than it did.
While the Farmdale/Dorsey legal challenges took up a great deal of time and energy for the Authority staff, it shouldn’t have prevented them from leaning on the contractors at the same time. The Authority Board hired CEO Thorpe to multitask, and the burden is on him to “bust a move” to get that project to Culver City in 2011.
The Authority staff members (including Steve Polechronis and Gabriella Collins, the duo I’ve most worked with) really have deserved props for making themselves available for presentations and outreach to the general public—all one ever need do is ask. I really do think they will succeed in building a first-rate Expo Line.
So here’s a final suggestion for the Authority Board and staff, as well as for all tasked with a major infrastructure construction project: demand that all contractors have the same face time with the general public as any staff members, and that they be well-acquainted with those who are ultimately paying their salary and fees.
We all deserve to know that our rail projects will be financially, technically and politically on track!
(Ken Alpern is a Boardmember of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC) and is both co-chair of the MVCC Transportation/Infrastructure Committee and past co-chair of the MVCC Planning Committee. He is co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and also chairs the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at Alpern@MarVista.org.This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it The views expressed in this article are solely those of Mr. Alpern.) ◘
CityWatch
Vol 7 Issue 81
Pub: Oct 2, 2009
Public hearing on MTA’s Crenshaw Transit Corridor set for Tuesday, Oct. 6th (Source: Westchester)
Public hearing on MTA’s Crenshaw Transit Corridor set for Tuesday, Oct. 6th
The Westchester Neighbors Association will host a public hearing on the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Crenshaw Transit Corridor Study at 7 p.m. Tuesday, October 6th at La Tijera United Methodist Church, 7400 Osage Ave., Westchester.
The proposed transit line starts at the Metro station at Imperial Highway and Aviation Boulevard and continues to Crenshaw Boulevard. The overall goal of the proposed project is to improve mobility in the corridor by connecting with existing lines such as the Metro Green Line or approved lines such as the Exposition Light Rail, currently under construction, according to Metro.
The October 6th meeting will focus on issues concerning the Westchester community.
The 45-day environmental impact report (EIR) comment period began September 1st.
Information, www.metro.net/crenshaw/.
So many rail agencies, so little service Metrolink safety is a problem, but the deeper issue is Southern California's hodgepodge of agencies that do not coordinate with each other. (Source: Latimes.com)
So many rail agencies, so little service
Metrolink safety is a problem, but the deeper issue is Southern California's hodgepodge of agencies that do not coordinate with each other.
By Paul Dyson
October 1, 2009 | 4:59 p.m.
The Times deserves credit for bringing attention to rail safety with its Sept. 27 article, "Death on the rails in L.A." But the article focused too much on the sensational and not enough on the root causes of Metrolink's safety problems. For example, I agree that the rail crossing in Burbank at the Buena Vista Street and San Fernando Road intersection, which The Times cited as a particularly dangerous crossing, needs to be grade separated. But because plans are already underway to do just that, why pick on that location when, judging by the graphic attached to the article, there are more problematic crossings in Anaheim, Corona and other communities?
The Times did not go into enough detail about the organizational problems plaguing Metrolink in particular and Southern California rail service as a whole. It failed to highlight the fact that we have three taxpayer-funded agencies providing "mainline" passenger train service in Southern California (Amtrak, Metrolink and San Diego County's Coaster). Nor did it make clear that the rights of way are owned either by individual county transportation agencies or private railroads such as BNSF and Union Pacific. Metrolink is little more than an operating agency beholden to the counties that formed it, and a stepchild when it comes to funding. If there is blame to be attached for safety lapses, there are plenty of targets, not just Metrolink.
In addition to divided responsibility for safety issues, this "structure" results in the complete failure to provide Southern California residents with a viable, user-friendly alternative to the automobile. Schedules aren't coordinated for seamless journeys around the region. Indeed, Metrolink cannot even provide good connections between its own routes. Such is the lack of cooperation that every day a southbound Amtrak train from San Luis Obispo must wait in Moorpark for more than 30 minutes for northbound Metrolink trains to pass. This is especially ironic as the chairman of Metrolink's board is a City Council member from Moorpark.
Even combining the regional services of Amtrak, Metrolink and the San Diego County systems would yield a boutique operation, amounting to fewer than 300 trains per day serving 83 stations in eight counties with a combined population of more than 20 million. I estimate that these systems serve between 15 million and 18 million passengers per year. By contrast, Switzerland (which is similar in size to the Southern California area served by passenger rail) has about 7.7 million residents who are served by roughly 2,000 miles of railroad and more than 800 stations. The Swiss operation offers passengers a unified timetable and ticketing system that provides through journeys and connections between almost any two points in the country. Imagine buying a through ticket from Santa Clarita to Catalina Island with guaranteed connections by train, light rail and ferry. The Swiss and their visitors made more than 350 million train journeys in 2008.
The Swiss did not build this system up overnight, nor was it inexpensive. But had Southern California embarked on such a plan when Metrolink began operations in 1992, we would have a much better system -- even if we were running no more trains or had no more stations than we do now. Without connections, the destination options for passengers are limited to the stations on their line.
What we have instead is a lack of vision and leadership. For years, the lead planning agency in the area, the Southern California Assn. of Governments, was mesmerized by completely unaffordable Maglev technology. Metrolink and Amtrak were barely considered in its transportation plans even though we had miles of existing rights of way that could have been exploited and improved.
Perhaps these conventional rail systems would get more attention if they were ultra-expensive. Or perhaps the issue is that Metrolink receives most of its funding from other transportation commissions, such as the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, that must each give up some of their money to fund this regional system. I don't have the answer, but as a taxpayer, I am paying for trains that don't connect and for bureaucrats that don't cooperate well with each other.
It isn't too late for us to make the necessary changes that will give us a user-friendly public transportation system. A unified passenger rail authority for Southern California would be a good start; it could quickly put out a single schedule and introduce a ticketing system that would accommodate connections. It could also speak with a single, loud voice on safety to ensure that the dangerous locations cited by The Times are given immediate attention.
Over the years, voters have approved taxes and bonds with the hope of enjoying a safe and convenient passenger rail system, but they have been badly let down by these multiple agencies. It's time for these "Berlin Walls" to come down. It's time we got some value for our money.
Paul Dyson is president of the Rail Passengers Assn. of California and Nevada (railpac.org) and chairman of Burbank's Transportation Commission.
Copyright © 2009, The Los Angeles Times
Thursday, October 1, 2009
L.A. mayor praises planned light-rail car plant Villaraigosa says the AnsaldoBreda facility, which begins construction next summer at the earliest, will attract 'decent middle-class jobs' and clean-technology firms to the city. (Source: LATimes.com)
L.A. mayor praises planned light-rail car plant
Villaraigosa says the AnsaldoBreda facility, which begins construction next summer at the earliest, will attract 'decent middle-class jobs' and clean-technology firms to the city.
By Phil Willon
October 1, 2009
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on Wednesday praised the planned construction of a light-rail car manufacturing plant along the Los Angeles River, saying it would bring "decent middle-class jobs" and attract clean technology firms to a city hard-hit by the national recession.
Italian rail-car maker AnsaldoBreda agreed to build a $70-million plant as part of its successful bid to deliver 100 additional light-rail cars to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. The MTA board -- which includes Villaraigosa -- last week OKd the $300-million contract as an extension of an existing manufacturing agreement.
"At a time when most cities across the country are hemorrhaging jobs, we'll be bringing them back home," Villaraigosa said at a news conference at Union Station.
Construction of the rail facility will begin next summer at the earliest and would take about a year, officials said.
Villaraigosa cited a study by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. that estimated that the rail-car plant would deliver $368 million in "economic activity" to the region. That study was commissioned by the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, which lobbied the MTA board in favor of the contract.
The mayor said that, according to the study, more than 650 people would find "good-paying jobs" at the plant, and that close to 1,000 union construction workers would build the structure. The study estimated that the facility would create 2,240 jobs, with 650 employed at the plant and the remainder from outside suppliers, manufacturers and other firms.
"Definitely, this is really good news for the L.A. economy," said Jack Kyser, the chief economist for the economic development corporation.
Kyser said the economic impact figures were extrapolated from AnsaldoBreda's employment projections for its new L.A. facilities: 535 full-time positions at the plant and 126 full-time positions at the corporate headquarters.
Those figures are based on AnsaldoBreda's expectation of building 75 rail cars and refurbishing 36 more annually at the L.A. plant. However, the MTA contract is the firm's only order thus far for that plant, and the MTA expects AnsaldoBreda to produce just 12 cars a year for the transportation agency.
AnsaldoBreda officials said that by establishing a U.S.-based manufacturing plant, the firm expects to win contracts from local governments across the country and become a competitive bidder on high-speed rail contracts in California and elsewhere.
AnsaldoBreda has a tentative deal with the city's Community Redevelopment Agency to build the plant on a 14-acre, city-owned site near 15th Street and Santa Fe Avenue. The firm would pay $906,000 in rent annually over the course of a 50-year lease. The company has also agreed to pay workers at least the living wage, which is $10.30 per hour plus benefits.
phil.willon@latimes.com
Times staff writer Maeve Reston contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2009, The Los Angeles Times
New Timetables Released for Gold Line, Includes Eastside Extension (Source: LAist)
New Timetables Released for Gold Line, Includes Eastside Extension
But don't get too excited as it's just one step in a long process that's almost completed. Although the timetable (.pdf) for the Gold Line now include eastside extension stations, they've been left blank. What a tease!
Yesterday, Metro officials announced that regular testing of the Gold Line's extension would commence on Sunday. An opening could come as soon as early November.
user-pic
By Zach Behrens in News on September 30, 2009 9:29 AM
Testing of light rail trains on Metro Gold Line starts Sunday (Source: LA Daily News)
Testing of light rail trains on Metro Gold Line starts Sunday
Daily News Wire Services
Updated: 09/30/2009 10:10:24 AM PDT
Testing of light rail trains along the Metro Gold Line extension from Union Station to East Los Angeles will kick into high gear Sunday, and Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials warned the public to beware of the increased number of trains that will be using the tracks.
The testing is designed to familiarize train operators and staff with the service, and synchronize the trains with the existing service on the Gold Line, which now provides service between Union Station and east Pasadena.
During the stepped-up testing phase, which could last for more than a month, passengers will disembark southbound trains from Pasadena at Union Station, but the train will continue south to East Los Angeles, then return northbound.
During peak hours, the trains will run every seven to eight minutes, and every 12 minutes during midday hours. At night, the trains will run every 20 minutes. On weekends and holidays, the trains will run every 15 to 20 minutes in the mornings, every 12 minutes during the day and every 20 minutes at night.
Supporters of High Speed Rail to Rally at Union Station Friday (Source: LAist)
Supporters of High Speed Rail to Rally at Union Station Friday
Last week the California High-Speed Rail Authority voted to submit a grant application to the federal government, asking for $4.8 billion in stimulus money for a high speed rail line that would connect Los Angeles and San Francisco with a few hours trip. On Friday, that application will be submitted after few rallies across the state, including one in Los Angeles.
California High Speed Rail officials along with politicians and other supporters will speak at 9 a.m. in the Old Ticket Room at Union Station.
The federal government has set aside $8 billion grants available to states vying for high speed rail. California, which has been working on the 800-mile project for 13 years, is asking for more than half. Most of the $4.8 billion sought would go towards the construction of track within three regions.
The sections are San Francisco to San Jose, Merced to Bakersfield and Los Angeles to Anaheim, which could open in 2018. Once built, the routes would be useable as construction continues to link them for a complete system.
An additional $300 million being requested would go towards the completion of the environmental review and preliminary engineering work of the whole system.
user-pic
By Zach Behrens in News on September 30, 2009 2:00 PM
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Gold Line officials seeking over $100 million in private financing (Source: Pasadena Star-News)
Gold Line officials seeking over $100 million in private financing
Posted: 09/29/2009 11:33:44 AM PDT
Gold Line authorities are looking for a contractor to put up $100 million to $150 million to expedite the start of construction on the first segment of its 24-mile extension to Claremont.
The Gold Line Foothill Extension Authority, the agency responsible for building the line, has set the completion date for 2013, but lacks the funding to get the project done on that time line.
To get the line going, the authority wants to commit to a firm that can afford to finance the project itself at first, and get paid back over time.
The authority has a commitment of up to $875 million from Measure R funds, but will likely receive the allotments on an annual basis until 2019.
The Metropolitan Transportation Agency, which is tasked with distributing the funds, has the completion date for the first phase of the Gold Line, to the Azusa/Glendora border, as 2017.
The Foothill Extension authority drew a crowd of about 200, many representing engineering firms, on Tuesday at an event devoted to explaining the bidding process to get the job.
The line's cost will be $320 million, and the authority will also be awarding a $30 million contract for bridgework. It is asking for an upfront commitment of $5 million from the contractor doing that project.
The authority would pay back the $100 million to $150 million as it gets its allotment of Measure R funds. Interest on the loan would ultimately cost the authority $30 million, officials say.
Gold Line Eastside Extension to Begin Regular Testing on Sunday (Source: LAist)
Gold Line Eastside Extension to Begin Regular Testing on Sunday
A Gold Line train pulls out of the Little Tokyo/Arts Distrct station during a test run | Photo by STERLINGDAVISPHOTO (website) via LAist Featured Photos on Flickr
If you see the Gold Line running through the Eastside and East L.A. on a regular basis next week, don't think you can hop on board at the nearest station. Metro officials announced today that pre-revenue light rail train testing will begin Sunday, lasting at least a month before opening to the public.
The testing phase will allow operators and control staff to experience service in real-time. Trains from Pasadena will begin to head eastbound (without passengers) instead of turning around at Union Station. Trains heading to Pasadena will arrive after traveling the new Eastside route.
Commuters will now get used to new weekday traffic patterns as trains will run during peak hours every 7 minutes to 8 minutes in the morning and afternoon; midday service will be every 12 minutes, and night service will be every 20 minutes. On Weekends, service will run every 12 to 20 minutes, depending on the time of day.
The eight new stations of the Metro Gold Line to East Los Angeles include Little Tokyo/Arts District, Pico/Aliso, Mariachi Plaza (underground), Soto (underground), Indiana, Maravilla, East L.A. Civic Center and Atlantic.
Bus Lanes on Wilshire? Chime in at Upcoming Community Meetings (Source: LAist)
Bus Lanes on Wilshire? Chime in at Upcoming Community Meetings
The Wilshire Bus Lane as integrated with rail routes, including the possible alignments for the Westside Extension | Image via Metro from a 2008 presentation
As Metro works on a subway to the Westside, they are also working on peak hour bus lanes down Wilshire Boulevard to the Santa Monica city line and excluding Beverly Hills. The project aims to improve traffic flow along Wilshire Boulevard, encourage the shift from car to public transit, improve bus travel times and reliability on bus service.
Of course, there will be challenges. Parking impacts, major intersections and narrower portions of the street in need of widening. Metro staff has studied much of this and as part of the process, they must update the public and listen to feedback. Like with the draft bicycle plan, four meetings have been scheduled in October:
Monday, October 5, 6:00 - 8 pm
Felicia Mahood Senior Center
11338 Santa Monica Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Wednesday, October 7, 6:00 - 8 pm
Wilshire United Methodist Church
4350 Wilshire Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Thursday, October 8, 6:00 - 8 pm
Westwood Presbyterian Church
10822 Wilshire Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Tuesday, October 13, 6:00 - 8 pm
Good Samaritan Hospital, Moseley-Salvatori Conference Center
637 Lucas Ave
Los Angeles, CA 90017
By Zach Behrens in News on September 29, 2009 9:50 AM
MTA seeking public input on Crenshaw transit plan (Source: Daily Breeze)
MTA seeking public input on Crenshaw transit plan
By Andrea Woodhouse Staff Writer
Posted: 09/28/2009 07:29:09 PM PDT
The Metropolitan Transportation Agency this week will begin soliciting public comment on an ambitious north-south public transit project that will affect several South Bay communities.
In a series of four hearings beginning Wednesday, Metro will present options for the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project, designed to ease freeway congestion and improve accessibility to Los Angeles International Airport through either a bus or light rail line.
"The intent is to improve accessibility to the areas along the line, to connect to the South Bay, relieve congestion and provide transit alternatives," said Roderick Diaz, a project manager.
The project area includes Hawthorne, El Segundo, Inglewood, Los Angeles and some portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County - essentially a 33-square-mile area bounded roughly by El Segundo, Wilshire, Sepulveda and La Tijera boulevards, and Arlington Avenue.
Here is the schedule of the hearings:
From 6 to 8 p.m. Wednesday at the Wilshire Methodist Church Hall of Fellowship, 4350 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles.
From 6 to 8 p.m. Thursday at the West Angeles Church's Crystal Room, 3045 Crenshaw Blvd., Los Angeles.
From 10 a.m. to noon Saturday at Inglewood High School's cafeteria, 231 S. Grevillea Ave.
From 6 to 8 p.m. Oct. 6 at Transfiguration Church Hall, 2515 W. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Los Angeles.
Diaz said public comment gathered at these hearings will factor into the Metro board's final vote at the end of the year on which of two project options to implement:
A bus line option would span 12 miles with eight stations, providing travel times of about 30 minutes from the Metro Green Line to the Expo Line, or about 40 minutes from the Green line to Wilshire Boulevard/Western Avenue. The project's cost is estimated at about $600 million in current dollars, with the expectation that 3,500 jobs would be created during its construction phase.
A light rail proposal would span more than eight miles with at least seven stations, and an estimated travel time of 20 minutes from the Metro Green Line to the Expo Line. The base cost is estimated at $1.3 billion, with various design options ranging in cost from $11 million to $255 million. The project is estimated to generate about 7,800 jobs.
Funded by Measure R, a half-cent sales tax increase approved by voters in November to fund transportation projects, the Crenshaw Corridor project is designed to provide relief to the San Diego (405) and Harbor (110) freeways.
It would also improve access to Los Angeles International Airport by connecting the Metro Green Line to the south and the Expo Line to the north. A bus line would also connect to the Wilshire Corridor.
Los Angeles County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas has supported the light rail option, which he believed was more environmentally friendly and efficient.
"For years, these communities have historically been underserved by transit investments, and the project will not only improve local mobility but also will generate jobs directly and indirectly for the entire region," he said in a statement.
Diaz estimated that the final design and construction process would begin in 2011 and last up to six years, with the system operational by 2018.
andrea.woodhouse@dailybreeze.com
Maglev developers forging ahead regardless of rival project (Source: Las Vegas Sun)
Maglev developers forging ahead regardless of rival project
By Richard N. Velotta (contact)
Monday, Sept. 28, 2009 | 11:45 p.m.If developers of a magnetic levitation transportation system linking Las Vegas with Anaheim, Calif., are worried about some of the political issues that could hamper their proposed $12 billion project, they didn’t show it Monday night.
Representatives of the American Magline Group, which wants to build the California-Nevada Interstate Maglev Project, said they would forge ahead with their plans even if a rival group breaks ground on a traditional steel-wheels-on-rails project by March, as the rivals have said they would.
Builders of the competing project, the $4 billion DesertXpress high-speed train, have launched a worldwide search for vendors and suppliers and already have completed an environmental impact statement. They say they’ll soon begin work on the project between Las Vegas and Victorville, Calif.
But Neil Cummings, president of the American Magline Group – a coalition of companies partnering to build the maglev for the nonprofit California-Nevada Super Speed Train Commission – said he thinks the public would be more supportive of his project.
“We’ll continue on no matter what,” Cummings said in response to a question of whether the maglev plan would die if DesertXpress gets off the ground.
“One way to answer that question is, is the DesertXpress really competition for the maglev system and, really, is it a competition?” Cummings said. “Because if somebody has a choice between 300 mile-an-hour travel between Anaheim and Las Vegas or an hour and 40 minute (trip) between Las Vegas and Victorville and then get a taxi or hitch a ride or whatever you do, I’m pretty sure we’d win a competition. In theory, even if DesertXpress gets built, I’d have no problem building our train alongside it and put them out of business.”
Cummings made his comments in the second of three transportation forums sponsored by the Transportation Research Center at UNLV and the Ward 5 Chamber of Commerce, which represents businesses in the vicinity of the expected terminus of both the maglev and the DesertXpress.
Tom Stone, president of DesertXpress, gave his project’s presentation on Aug. 31 and a third forum featuring other lower-profile high-speed transportation systems is scheduled for Oct. 19.
Cummings was one of several speakers on the maglev project with representatives from other American Magline Group partners – Transrapid International USA, Hirschfeld Industries, General Atomics and Parsons – sharing the spotlight.
In recent days, political controversies have swirled around the maglev proposal with the issuance of a press release by the office of Gov. Jim Gibbons announcing the pending arrival of $45 million in federal funds to complete engineering and environmental studies for the first chunk of the maglev project, a 40-mile link between Las Vegas and Primm.
But Federal Railroad Administration officials denied that the money was forthcoming anytime soon.
Cummings explained that his group isn’t actually awaiting a check; that’s not the procedure. Instead, he said the Nevada Department of Transportation is awaiting a contract for the scope of work to be performed. Then, the American Magline Group can proceed and would be reimbursed for completed work. He added that the group already has posted $11 million in matching funds as required by legislation authorizing the $45 million.
Much of the American Magline Group presentation explained how the technology works. Maglevs are propelled by electromagnetic fields that pull the 50-ton vehicles across a guideway at speeds of up to 310 mph. While the vehicles and their guideway tracks look like a monorail, the vehicles never make contact with the track. Because there is no contact and no wheels, maglevs are quiet and don’t require the costly maintenance cycles that traditional trains need.
Other details that came out of Monday’s forum:
• Transrapid USA, a subsidiary of the German company that developed the maglev technology that is being used commercially on a line connecting downtown Shanghai with the city’s airport, would license the technology to the American vendors and Cummings said the trains and guideways would be manufactured in Las Vegas, creating 13,000 jobs.
• Tom Bordeaux, senior transportation manager for Parsons, the engineering company partner, said the Transrapid system is designed to last 80 years with no major maintenance. Traditional trains need to have steel rails replaced about every seven years because of the pounding high-speed trains give them in their thousands of annual trips. Bordeaux also said Parsons would develop the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center, the proposed terminus of the maglev line and a station where all of Southern California’s transportation systems – light rail, commuter trains and buses – would converge.
• While some critics have said maglev is unproven, Walter Buss, president of Transrapid International USA, said the Shanghai system already has traveled 4.1 million miles, carrying 20 million passengers, and it has a 99.8 percent on-time operating efficiency.
• One-way tickets on the maglev between Las Vegas and Anaheim are proposed to cost $55, comparable to today’s airline fares and the pricetag estimated by DesertXpress for its service.
• Cummings said the maglev project has support in Southern California because the line would link Anaheim with Ontario International Airport, an underused facility east of Los Angeles. With Los Angeles International and Anaheim’s John Wayne Airport at or near capacity, Ontario could be better utilized and passengers could access it on the maglev from Anaheim within minutes.
• Cummings said the proposed maglev route would not traverse the Mohave National Preserve, a National Park Service-administered area south of Las Vegas. The entire route, he said, would use Department of Transportation right-of-way or Bureau of Land Management property and imminent domain would not be pursued. One of the DesertXpress route proposals would cut through a small piece of the Mohave National Preserve.
• Cummings said the lack of progress on maglev that frustrated Sen. Harry Reid enough to make him switch allegiance earlier this year to the DesertXpress was the result of a lack of high-speed rail policy leadership within the federal government. He added that he is proud of the progress the maglev plan has made in the last year after President Obama emphatically stated that high-speed rail is a priority for his administration.
Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit Project Proposal: Dedicated Curbside Bus Lanes (Source: MTA)
2009-09-25
Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit Project Proposal: Dedicated Curbside Bus Lanes
Metro, the City of Los Angeles, and Los Angeles County are considering the feasibility of implementing a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project on Wilshire Boulevard.This joint effort will be evaluated through the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment (EIR/EA).
The EIR/EA, which will be prepared in compliance with State and Federal environmental requirements, will examine the potential for dedicated curbside bus lanes during the morning and evening rush hours along Wilshire Boulevard, from just west of the I-110 freeway to the Santa Monica city line, excluding the City of Beverly Hills.
These same three agencies began evaluating the proposed Wilshire BRT Project in November 2008 as part of preparing an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment (IS/EA).An EIR/EA is now being prepared as a consequence of input received at several community meetings held along the corridor at that time, additional public input, and technical analyses that have been conducted.
Please join us at any of the four (4) scoping meetings to learn more about the Proposed Project and Project Alternatives.These meetings will provide the public the opportunity to comment on the project and any potential effects of the project that should be considered in the Draft EIR/EA.The content presented at these four meetings will be identical, so please make sure to attend at the time and location most convenient for you.
Monday, October 5, 6:00 – 8 pm
Felicia Mahood Senior Center
11338 Santa Monica Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Wednesday, October 7, 6:00 – 8 pm
Wilshire United Methodist Church
4350 Wilshire Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Thursday, October 8, 6:00 – 8 pm
Westwood Presbyterian Church
10822 Wilshire Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Tuesday, October 13, 6:00 – 8 pm
Good Samaritan Hospital, Moseley-Salvatori Conference Center
637 Lucas Ave
Los Angeles, CA 90017
All meeting locations are accessible by public transit. Please go to Metro.net to plan your trip. Parking is also available. Garage parking at Good Samaritan is not validated and costs $8.
More Information:
Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit EIR/EA
Controversial company wins new MTA rail car contract
Controversial company wins new MTA rail car contract
By Dan Abendschein, Staff Writer
Posted: 09/25/2009 04:06:33 PM PDT
LOS ANGELES - County transit authorities have voted to award a contract for new rail cars to the same company that failed to deliver all the rail cars the county purchased in a previous deal.
Metropolitan Transportation Authority board authorized its staff Thursday to finalize the contract with Italian manufacturer AnsaldoBreda in the next 30 days. The contract is for 100 new rail cars for local rail lines.
The company had previously been awarded a $158.7-million MTA contract in 2003 to deliver 50 light rail cars by 2007.
It has delivered only 27 of the those 50 cars - and each car is 6,000 pounds over the MTA's weight specifications. They are also incompatible with other MTA rail cars and cannot operate on its Green and Blue lines.
County Supervisor Michael Antonovich voted against the contract, calling it a "return to sleaze" for the MTA. He was one of only three MTA board members to vote against the contract, with eight in favor.
The contract had been up for discussion at several past meetings, with various board members reprimanding the company both for its work in the last contract and for accusing a competitor of having ties to Iran.
To make up for past problems, the company agreed to provide the MTA a $300 million financial guarantee. If the company does not deliver the cars according to contract terms, the MTA could use the guaranteed credit to recoup the cost of the contract.