Streetsblog Los Angeles

Atlantic Station. Photo: LA Streetsblog/Flickr

There have been a fair number of folks making comments on this site and
elsewhere on the internet about the recently opened Gold Line Eastside
Extension and safety. This coming week the advisory committee that
provides input to Metro on such issues is holding a meeting near the
Indiana Street station (Alma is the next street east of Indiana, and
the School is midway between 1st and 3rd Streets) in the evening.
Certainly worth checking out if you want to share such comments directly .

Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension Review Advisory Committee
Thursday
Jan. 14, 2010
6 p.m.-8 p.m.
Ramona Opportunity High School
231 S. Alma Ave.
Los Angeles CA

Rendering of proposed Bergamont Station in Santa Monica. Photo:Santa Monica via Friends 4 Expo

(This is the first in a four part series following up on stories that have run through the year but aren’t yet finished.)

Just because the word "Final" appears in the document name doesn’t mean that the battle over the routing and crossings for the Expo Line have ended.  While the Final Environmental Impact Report predictably contained good news for supporters of getting the light rail line completed quickly, even the most enthusiastic supporters know that there are still opponents of the project that still have some arrows left in their quiver.

Karen Leonard, the co-chair of Light Rail for Cheviot, writes, "I’m very glad that the Expo Authority took neighborhood comments seriously and discussed the grade separation possibilities at Overland and Westwood at length and in detail.  Since LADOT now concurs with Expo that these
crossings should be at-grade, given the mitigations proposed, one hopes that NIMBYs in several homeowners’ associations do not succeed in funding litigation and delaying the line significantly."

While Leonard is choosing her words carefully, she’s referring to the coalition of affluent Westside neighborhoods that have rallied together under the banner of Neighbors for Smart Rail.  Friends 4 Expo member "Gokhan" takes a less-nuanced approach to defining NfSR’s position in the Streetsblog comments section:

NFSR comes next. Terri Tippit, the veteran Westside neighborhood
politician, Head of the West of Westwood Homeowners’ Association and at
times the President of the Westside Neighborhood Council, is the
President of Neighbors for Smart Rail (NFSR). Collen Mason Heller of
the Cheviot Hills Homeowners’ Association is the Vice President of
NFSR. Her husband Larry Heller is the attorney for NFSR. NFSR has been
collecting a lot of money in order to launch a lawsuit within 30 days
of the certification by the board of the Expo Authority of the final
environmental-impact report on the first Thursday of January. (editor’s note, the date for approval has been moved to February 4)

Officially, the position of Neighbors for Smart Rail is not that the line shouldn’t be built, but that the line needs to have safe (i.e. not at-grade) crossings near Westside schools as it rolls by.  Legal actions against the Expo Construction Authority in South L.A. have forced the agency to add additional pedestrian amenities near Dorsey High School.  However, thus far Neighbors for Smart Rail is playing it close to the chest.  The group is not quoted in any of the press accounts of the FEIR release and emails requesting comment for this article have not been returned.  I’m sure there will be a lot more on this story in the coming year.

The Source has a full sized map here.

The Expo Construction Authority has finally released the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Phase II of the Expo Line with some key changes.  I'll spend more time reviewing the document and talking to some of the key players in the drama over the weekend and will be back with a longer story on Monday.  But for those of you that can't wait to start talking, here are the key changes from the press release, which can be read in its entirety here.  Or you can read the environmental documents in their entirety on the Expo Construction Authority Board website.

Meanwhile, here are the key changes from the Draft EIR per the Construction Authority's Press Release.

Inclusion of a design option that removes the park-and-ride lot at the Westwood station;

A Maintenance Facility design option which includes Santa Monica College and Verizon properties with a 100-110 foot buffer, providing additional protection from the residential community to the south of the proposed facility;

Accommodation of a continuous bikeway from the Phase 1 terminus to Santa Monica;

An additional grade separation at Centinela;

Addition of a 3rd northbound lane on Sepulveda for the at-grade crossing;

Inclusion of a design option for grade separation at Sepulveda if outside funding sources become available.

Yesterday, transit advocates received a double-dose of good news as the air of compromise blew in and the debate over two light rail projects was changed.  In Santa Monica, the City Council endorsed a "compromise" plan on the location of a light rail yard for Expo Phase II.  Downtown, Metro staff unveiled a new potential design for an entirely below-grade Downtown Connector that could address all of the concerns of the Little Tokyo community.

For the full image, visit The Source.  If the page doesn't load, it's their server, not my link, that's the problem.

First announced at The Source, then covered at Blogdowntown, Metro staff unveiled a draft of what the Downtown Connector would look like if it were entirely below-grade.  Previous drafts, including a plan referred to as "the Underground Emphasis Option" had the train spending a lot of time at-grade in Little Tokyo.  Even the most underground option had The Connector coming above ground near First and Alameda before connecting to an at-grade station.  Blogdowntown explains the new alternative:

The new alternative would instead place a station underneath the Office Depot site, with trains continuing under the intersection as tracks split to emerge via portals along Alameda and in the middle of 1st.

The Alameda portal would be located north of Temple street, while the 1st street tracks would rise just east of Alameda, leveling off just past Hewitt. Some temporary track on 1st would allow the newly-opened Gold Line Eastside Extension to continue operating throughout construction.

Of course, there are still significant barriers before such a design becomes a part of the final plan.  Most importantly, it needs to be included in Metro's environmental review, a step the agency has yet to announce.  Second, the new plan would cost a cool $200 million more than the most expensive of the currently studied options.  Not surprisingly, even the expanded price tag didn't bother the Little Tokyo community that saw the design last night and voted unanimously to encourage further study.

Meanwhile, in Santa Monica, the City Council voted to endorse a location for the maintenance yard that will house Expo's light rail cars when they're not active on the line.  The surrounding community had argued that a residential neighborhood was a poor location for the yard, but as Curbed reports, via the Argonaut, there were some compromises.

Concessions have been made: A city official tells the paper that the "new planned location had been redesigned to eliminate 'wheel squeal' from the train and a car wash and cleaning platform would be relocated north of the Verizon property. A 110-foot sound barrier is also proposed to reduce noise from the train and the light rail yard."

Again, two issues remain before the light rail yard is a done-deal.  First, it's Metro, not the City of Santa Monica that decides where the yard goes.  Second, the station's new neighbors aren't done fighting.  Now they're concerned with a higher-than-originally reported level of methane gas in the area.

Photo: Tim Adams/Flickr

The reviews are in on yesterday's opening of the Gold Line: the day was a rousing success.  Press accounts were universally positive.  Sometimes they focused on what a glorious and succesful day yesterday was by itself.  Other times they took a more universal view.  I wasn't at the opening, I'll make a point to ride the line during business hours sometime in the next two weeks, but I know you were so feel free to fill the comments section with your stories and opinions from yesterday's Golden party.

If you were like me and skipped the party, here's a sampling of the press coverage from yesterday.

• After Decades of Waiting, Their Train Has Arrived (Times)
• Video of Different Sites from Yesterday (The Source)
• Photoes of Different Sites from Yesterday (The Source)
  
• A Golden Reality (LA Opinion) 
• Why Are People Still Talking Subways (Human Transit)
  
• Workday Commuters Piling on Gold Line (LA Now)
  
• Times Editorial Takes a Shot at Molina Before Going Into Celebration Mode

Community turnout was strong at public meetings on what to do for the Crenshaw Corridor. Photo: Wad/Flickr

In what can only be considered a win for County Supervisor and Metro Board Member Mark Ridley-Thomas the Metro staff is now recommending that light rail, not Bus Rapid Transit, be brought to the Crenshaw Corridor. Ridley-Thomas has been active behind the scenes and in front of the microphone pushing for adequate funding for light rail for his district.

However, just because a politician supports an idea doesn't mean it necessarily has the support of the communities he represents. For example, remember the vitriolic exchanges between Damien Goodmon and City Councilman, and former Ridley-Thomas opponent, Bernard Parks. So will Crenshaw run into similar opposition as Phase I of Expo? It depends who you ask. While some activists are thrilled to be getting light rail instead of "more buses," others question the proposed alignment.

At the Times' LA_Now blog, the Los Angeles Urban League gives the project a thumbs up:

"We do consider it a victory," said Trevor Ware, chief operating officer of the Los Angeles Urban League.

"Look at the transportation options that we have now. We have buses on Crenshaw and we see other neighborhoods that are developing other types of transportation options," Ware added.

"To have a decision made that we will have light rail - that's so much faster and will have so much more of an economic impact - we need that too," he said.

This morning, I exchanged emails with Goodmon, who seemed supportive of the numerous below-grade crossings and stations for the project but also vowed to push on for further below-grade construction:

We applaud the inclusion of options into the Base LRT design, specifically the below grade Hyde Park portion, and the continued study of the remaining options. Our current focus is on getting the EIR to study the remaining portion between 48th and 60th that is not currently being studied for below grade, so as to avoid future delay from a supplemental environmental process.

For a list of all the grade crossings, visit the agenda for next week's Planning Committee meeting and head to page 5.

Goodmon also noted that there are other areas that might concern the community. Namely that the staff's recommended contractor is not from South L.A., undercutting Ridley-Thomas' boast of 8,700 new jobs and that any at-grade alignment is against the stated position of the City of Los Angeles and the Crenshaw Corridor Specific Plan. The resolution was sponsored by local City Councilmembers Parks and Wesson. A full copy of Goodmon's statement is available after the jump.

Read more...

Our friend and light rail enthusiast Darrell Clarke brings us video of a ride on the Gold Line Eastside Extension from the front of the cab.  Clarke took the video during the "preview" Metro held for press last Friday.  Thanks to Clarke's placement near a speaker, this video is a perfect substitute for actually having been at the event yourself.  You can listen as Metro gives its Eastside Tour even as you look out the front window of the train as it travels though the Eastside to the Atlantic Avenue stop.

The full text of Clarke's email, and the videos are available after the jump:

Read more...

Ray LaHood likes the Eastside Extension…but will we? Image: The Fastlane

One week from today the Eastside Bike Club, Streetsblog and the Bus Bench will meet at the Union Station Entrance to bike the six-mile Gold Line Extension to document what we see concerning crossings and safety.  I’ve been getting a lot of questions about the ride, so I’m going to answer as many of them as I can here.

If you have other questions, put them in the comments section, and I’ll answer them in the body of the article.

What’s the point of doing this ride anyway?

There’s been a lot of controversy over safety issues with the opening of the Gold Line Extension.  When there’s a complaint or suggestion, the answers have either been that they’re going to fix that before the opening or that the person complaining was probably doing their nails and breaking the law.  We’re going to ride at street level, witness what the crossings look like at rush hour and come to our own conclusions.  

Why so close to the line’s opening?  Won’t that minimize the impact of your findings?

This isn’t planned as an advocacy ride, more of a fact finding mission.  By riding so close to the line’s opening we’re giving Metro as much time as we can to make all the improvements that they can.

When did you start hating/stop trusting Metro?

I don’t hate Metro.  I actually think light rail is one of the safest forms of transit.  But, that doesn’t mean we have to take everything they say at face value.  I wouldn’t be surprised if we end up really liking all the improvements and changes that have taken place over the last couple of months.

What’s the route?

The route is super simple.  We’ll ride south to the Little Tokyo stop then head east on 1st Street all the way to the Indiana stop.  Then we’ll head east on Third until the light rail ends at the Atlantic Ave. stop.

What do I have to do to join the ride?

Nothing.  Just show up at the entrance to Union Station by 7:30 next Friday.  If you’re under 18, you’re required to wear a helmet.  Other than that, I trust you to decide how to protect yourself and if you’re ready to ride East L.A. at morning rush hour.

A diagram of the rail car plant repeatedly promised by Ansaldo Breda. To see the full image go here.

Because the news broke on a weekend, the press reports on the dissolution of the talks between Metro and AnsaldoBreda on extending the exclusive contract to build rail cars for the agency were less-than-complete.  Before the news of the verdict in the Christopher Thompson case broke, I was working on a F.A.Q. that would answer all of the questions that are being asked about AnsaldoBreda, the future rail car contract, and what's next for Metro and AnsaldoBreda.  The full F.A.Q. is available after the jump.  If you have any questions not answered, leave them in the comments section and I'll do my best to answer them by the end of the day.

What happened?  I thought the Board and AnsaldoBreda agreed to a contract extension at the September Board Meeting?

While the Board had agreed to extend its exclusive contract with AnsaldoBreda for the construction of light rail cars, that extension came with some pretty hefty conditions.  The most contentious of those was the requirement that AnsaldoBreda deposit hundreds of millions of dollars into a bank account that Metro could draw against everyday that the Italian Rail Car Company was late delivering vehicles.  At the last moment, AnsaldoBreda requested that there be hard limits on how Metro could draw against the account.  Metro didn't agree.

What happens to Metro's rail car contracts now?

Metro will need to open the bidding process for any rail car company to make a run at getting the contract for constructing the "Measure R Cars."  We expect the contract competition to be announced at the next Metro Board Meeting.  Back in March staff "warned" that it would take six months for the bidding process to come to its conclusion, so we can expect a contract to be signed early in the summer of 2010.  If Metro had cut bait with AnsaldoBreda in March, we would have known for months who was going to be building our rail cars for the future by now.

Read more...