DOCSLIB.ORG

Transportation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CITY OF LOS ANGELES INTER-DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE Date: March 24, 2008 To: Th Honora le Ci;ty Council From: . R · on, General Manager Department of Transportation SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION CONCERNING PROPOSED METRO JUNE 2008 BUS SERVICE CHANGES (CF 08·0350) The purpose of this report is to provide the City Council with supplemental information concerning proposed bus transit service changes to be implemented by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) in June 2008. The Department's original report on this matter, dated March 7, 2008, included a summary provided by Metro of all proposed service changes that were under consideration as part of the public hearing process conducted by Metro in February 2008 (CF 08-0350). Based on input from the public hearing process, Metro staff has subsequently submitted modified recommendations for consideration by the five Metro Service Sector Governance Councils (Westside/Central, South Bay, San Gabriel Valley, Gateway Cities and San Fernando Valley). The five Metro Service Sector Governance Councils met in early March 2008 to consider the staff's recommended service changes and approved a package of service changes that in some cases modified, postponed or eliminated proposed cuts in service. Attachment 1 of this report is an updated summary provided by Metro that illustrates the original list of proposed service changes considered as part of the public hearing process, along with Metro staff's revised recommendations and the actions taken by the five Metro Service Sector Governance Councils. As mentioned above, the actions taken by the five Sector Governance Councils differ in a number of cases from the original and revised proposed changes by Metro staff. Attachment 2 is a summary prepared by the Department of Transportation (LADOT) of the actions taken by the Metro Sector Governance Councils that affect transit service in the City of Los Angeles. LADOT has identified the respective Council Districts affected by each of the approved service changes and has provided summary comments as to the general severity of the impacts on riders. As discussed in the Department's March 7, 2008 report, Metro's proposed June 2008 bus service changes are designed to help reduce its projected budget deficit and expand the operation of its Rapid Bus Program (including the operation of six new lines TRANSPORTATION MAR 2 8 2008 Honorable City Council 2 March 24, 2008 Metro Bus Service Changes 08-0350 and the expansion of frequency and span of service on three other lines) by significantly reducing the hours of local transit services operated. The Department understands the need for Metro to reduce its operating budget to address projected shortfalls. The City is facing its own financial shortfall, and also faces tough decisions concerning potential reductions in service. However, LADOT is concerned about aspects of Metro's approach to reduce service levels. We support Metro's strategy to judiciously reduce the number of trips on selected routes to more effectively meet demand. However, we do have concerns about Metro's proposals to cancel certain lower performing routes. While some of these local routes proposed for curtailment or elimination are also served by alternative services, there are a number of routes in the City which appear to provide vitally needed transit service to schools, businesses and residents and have no viable alternatives available. While the City is encouraged to see that Metro is planning to expand its successful Rapid Bus Program, we are concerned that Metro is using local service cuts to redirect resources to expand the Rapid Bus Program. In some cases, it appears that Metro is converting scheduled limited stop lines to high frequency, headway-based Rapid Bus lines in corridors that are unlikely to produce the amount of ridership necessary to support them. As the primary transit provider in Los Angeles City and County, it is important that Metro maintains lifeline service coverage throughout its service area so that transit riders can readily access the regional transit system. Enhancing the regional Rapid Bus Program at the expense of canceling local lines with no viable alternative service available will negatively impact the mobility of many transit-dependent riders. Further, this may also have the undesirable impact of forcing persons with disabilities from the fixed route transit system to the more costly Access Services, Inc. (ASI) program. Based in part on significant input from the public, the Metro Sector Governance Councils have approved service changes this month that attempt to minimize the impacts on riders, including the modification or elimination of selected proposed service cuts. In other cases, selected proposed service cuts were postponed pending coordination with other jurisdictions. Attachments 1 and 2 summarize the actions taken by the Metro Sector Governance Councils. It is unclear at this point whether these approved service cuts for June 2008 meet Metro's overall target for reduction in service hours and whether additional service cuts will have to be considered by the Metro Sector Governance Councils and/or the Metro Board. Attachments ATTACHMENT 1 METRO SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AND APPROVED BUS SERVICE CHANGES FOR JUNE 2008 JUNE 2008 SERVICE CHANGES ORIGINAL PROPOSAL REVISED PROPOSAL Sector Tine Line Name Une Type rigina! Proposal Revised Propo.sal Acti<m bySGC Downtown LA • W Hollywood via Temple St Cancel late night and Owl service Propose to operate servite from 4:00 am we 10 & Melrose Ave LOC<!I Tier 1 to 11:00 p.m. ___ _ _ __ I;:•I_CanceiOwl servj~ _Propose to operate servi.ee from 4:00a.m. to 12:30 a.m. 'Cancellate night and Owl service. Propose to operate service from 4:00 a.m. "'"'"'"' we 14 Downtown lA · Beverly HiiJs via Beverly 81 local Tier 1 :to 11:00 p.m. :· Cancel Owl service. Propose to operate seMce from 4:00a.m. to 12:00 a.m. Not Approved Downtown LA -Fairfax-Washing\0!1 via Cancellate night and Owl service. Propose to cp<!rnte service from 4:00 a.m. Adams Btvd local 1 :to 11:00 p.m. !Cancel Owl service. Propose to operate se!Vice from 4:00a.m. to 12:30 a.m. Apj)roved :we 31 ----- T~er I ; Downtown LA-Fairfax-Washington via :cancel !ate night and Owl service. Propose to operate service from 4:00 a.m. Propose to operate seMce from 4:00a.m.: we 38 iJefferson Stvd. Local Tier 1 !to 11:00 p.m. ""~"' we 220 !w Hollywood ..Culver City via Robertson Local Tier 3 ;Service to be cam:eled due to km ridership. Not Approved. Deferred to Dec. 08 Blvd~ ---· [Pico/Rimpau -M:>nterey Part< via Pioo Blvd. & I we 330 !East 1st$L Umi!ed Tier 1 ·Service on Une 33<l to be replaced with new Metro Rapid Une 730. Approved Rapid Tier 1 ' Improve frequency and span of service a$ required by (;{lnsent Decree. we --·-~-!~---~~ lA- Beverly Hills via Beverty Bl - --·---- Approved Downtown lA -Picc/Rimpau via Pico Blvd. 1 NEW LINE 730 !Metro Rapid Approved we --------+-'""'"'pid Tier 1 wvice t~_:_~~~~-~-~~-~~~ ~o_!ll_~~~ lA~~~~-~-~ /l.arina Del Ray-City of Commerce via ieancel service west ofFo~ Hills Transit Center to Marina de! Rey, sa 1081358 Slauson Ave Local Tier 1 finclude Culver City 2. Big Blue Bus 14, and Metro Une 110 Approved Extend route from Playa Vista to southem Marina del Rey; cancel service lrewn by staff but may be considered for future implementation. sa of Garfiekl Ave.; alternative service provided by Bell Gan:lens Trolley. with alternative providers will continue Approved )cancel Una 315 and rep!ace with rnlW Une 715; reduce service frequency on SB ;une 115. Approved Cancel Sunday service, alternatives include the Metro Green line and Une sa 117 on Cenhlry. Approved ,Service to be canceled. Aftematives include Une 125 on Rosecrans and the SB Approved l~~Gr~~~ ten route to new north terminal at Crenshaw Green Una Station. iService to be canceled. Alternatives inc!ude Une 125 on Rosecrans, line 21 fing service via 120lh Street and Hawthorne BMI., to Hawthorne Green , ..v. - Approved sa ~-~· )0!1 Crenshaw, and line 40 on Hawthorne Station. I ·- -~ ·- ----------- -------·· ! ' Cancel service sooth of Del Amo Blvd. to Wilmington. Continue service north j via 'Service to be canceled. Alternatives includelJle Metro Blue Une, Une 205on of Del Amo StWon to ~mpton and Willowbrook. induding se!\Fice to DPSS I /Willowbroo!<.·~mpton-Wi!minton SB 202 !Willowbrook Ave. Local Tier 3 :Wilmington Ave., lJle Hahn Trol!ey, ami Compton Renaissance to new shopping center. -------'" -----!---~---- Approved :ancel midday service and cancel all service sooth of Imperial Highway via to Gardena and via Normand!e Ave .• and Imperia! Hwy., to !WilshireiWestem Station-Gardena via Van j lse!V\ce to be canceled. Anematives inc!ude Une 210 on Crenshaw Blvd. and Une Station. Establish new soullt terminal at Crenshaw sa --:______ 209 L_________ !Ness Ave. !l----------- local Tier 3 !'Line----------------------·----·-·--·--··--·---- 207 on Western Ave. ~ hour service north to Wilshirei'Westem Station _ _ L______ , Approved .;th~der ~~s. o~;.;;~g~~ry -60 minutes mst;d ~~-! '!Inglewood-South Bay Galleria via Prairie Ave i ~Service to be canceled. Alternatives include Une 40 oo Hawthorne Blvd. and iSB 30 minutes l Approved 211015 TI& 3 I'"' '"'''-"""IA"'------~---1' .':"".' :li"~""'""""-"'"' ~"'----~- ... - iLA Unioo Station -LAX Trnnsit Center iMdday and weekend service to be cance!ed. Altematives inc!ude Unes 42 SB 439 ;Express via 1-110 Fwy. Express Tier 2 )and 110 in La<lero and Culver City 6on Sepulveda. -~~-~---,---~-~------ -~-------·~-·-·-- -~------------·- --~- - i'' .. -- ""~"' 1 I IDowntown L.A. ·West Tommce Rolfir.g Hills-! !Midday and weekend service to be canceled north of Artesia Trnnsit Center·l SB 444 !Rancho Palos Ve«tes Express ! Express Tier 2/be replaced with expanded line 450X.
Recommended publications
  • BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States

    BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States

    BRTOD – State of the Practice in the United States By: Andrew Degerstrom September 2018 Contents Introduction .............................................................................................1 Purpose of this Report .............................................................................1 Economic Development and Transit-Oriented Development ...................2 Definition of Bus Rapid Transit .................................................................2 Literature Review ..................................................................................3 BRT Economic Development Outcomes ...................................................3 Factors that Affect the Success of BRTOD Implementation .....................5 Case Studies ...........................................................................................7 Cleveland HealthLine ................................................................................7 Pittsburgh Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway East Liberty Station ..... 11 Pittsburgh Uptown-Oakland BRT and the EcoInnovation District .......... 16 BRTOD at home, the rapid bus A Line and the METRO Gold Line .........20 Conclusion .............................................................................................23 References .............................................................................................24 Artist rendering of Pittsburgh's East Liberty neighborhood and the Martin Luther King, Jr. East Busway Introduction Purpose of this Report If Light Rail Transit (LRT)
  • [Title Over Two Lines (Shift+Enter to Break Line)]

    [Title Over Two Lines (Shift+Enter to Break Line)]

    BUS TRANSFORMATION PROJECT White Paper #2: Strategic Considerations October 2018 DRAFT: For discussion purposes 1 1 I• Purpose of White Paper II• Vision & goals for bus as voiced by stakeholders III• Key definitions IV• Strategic considerations Table of V• Deep-dive chapters to support each strategic consideration Contents 1. What is the role of Buses in the region? 2. Level of regional commitment to speeding up Buses? 3. Regional governance / delivery model for bus? 4. What business should Metrobus be in? 5. What services should Metrobus operate? 6. How should Metrobus operate? VI• Appendix: Elasticity of demand for bus 2 DRAFT: For discussion purposes I. Purpose of White Paper 3 DRAFT: For discussion purposes Purpose of White Paper 1. Present a set of strategic 2. Provide supporting analyses 3. Enable the Executive considerations for regional relevant to each consideration Steering Committee (ESC) to bus transformation in a neutral manner set a strategic direction for bus in the region 4 DRAFT: For discussion purposes This paper is a thought piece; it is intended to serve as a starting point for discussion and a means to frame the ensuing debate 1. Present a The strategic considerations in this paper are not an set of strategic exhaustive list of all decisions to be made during this considerations process; they are a set of high-level choices for the Bus Transformation Project to consider at this phase of for regional strategy development bus transformation Decisions on each of these considerations will require trade-offs to be continually assessed throughout this effort 5 DRAFT: For discussion purposes Each strategic consideration in the paper is 2.
  • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) What Is the MUTCD?

    Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) What Is the MUTCD?

    National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Bus/BRT Applications Introduction • I am Steve Andrle from TRB standing in for Randy McCourt, DKS Associates and 2019 ITE International Vice President • I co-manage with Claire Randall15 TRB public transit standing committees. • I want to bring you up to date on planned bus- oriented improvements to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) What is the MUTCD? • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) – Standards for roadway signs, signals, and markings • Authorized in 23 CFR, Part 655: It is an FHWA document. • National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) develops content • Sponsored by 19 organizations including ITE, AASHTO, APTA and ATSSA (American Traffic Safety Services Association) Background • Bus rapid transit, busways, and other bus applications have expanded greatly since the last edition of the MUTCD in 2009 • The bus-related sections need to be updated • Much of the available research speaks to proposed systems, not actual experience • The NCUTCD felt it was a good time to survey actual systems to see what has worked, what didn’t work, and to identify gaps. National Survey • The NCUTCD established a task force with APTA and FTA • Working together they issued a survey in April of 2018. I am sure some of you received it. • The results will be released to the NCUTCD on June 20 – effectively now • I cannot give you any details until the NCUTCD releases the findings Survey Questions • Have you participated in design and/or operations of
  • Transit Service Plan

    Transit Service Plan

    Attachment A 1 Core Network Key spines in the network Highest investment in customer and operations infrastructure 53% of today’s bus riders use one of these top 25 corridors 2 81% of Metro’s bus riders use a Tier 1 or 2 Convenience corridor Network Completes the spontaneous-use network Focuses on network continuity High investment in customer and operations infrastructure 28% of today’s bus riders use one of the 19 Tier 2 corridors 3 Connectivity Network Completes the frequent network Moderate investment in customer and operations infrastructure 4 Community Network Focuses on community travel in areas with lower demand; also includes Expresses Minimal investment in customer and operations infrastructure 5 Full Network The full network complements Muni lines, Metro Rail, & Metrolink services 6 Attachment A NextGen Transit First Service Change Proposals by Line Existing Weekday Frequency Proposed Weekday Frequency Existing Saturday Frequency Proposed Saturday Frequency Existing Sunday Frequency Proposed Sunday Frequency Service Change ProposalLine AM PM Late AM PM Late AM PM Late AM PM Late AM PM Late AM PM Late Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl R2New Line 2: Merge Lines 2 and 302 on Sunset Bl with Line 200 (Alvarado/Hoover): 15 15 15 20 30 60 7.5 12 7.5 15 30 60 12 15 15 20 30 60 12 12 12 15 30 60 20 20 20 30 30 60 12 12 12 15 30 60 •E Ğǁ >ŝŶĞϮǁ ŽƵůĚĨŽůůŽǁ ĞdžŝƐƟŶŐ>ŝŶĞƐϮΘϯϬϮƌŽƵƚĞƐŽŶ^ƵŶƐĞƚůďĞƚǁ
  • Powerpoint Template

    Powerpoint Template

    The Challenges of Planning and Executing Major Underground Transit Programs in Los Angeles Bryan Pennington, Senior Executive Officer, Program Management • Nation’s third largest transportation system • FY2018 Budget of $6.1 billion • Over 9,000 employees • Nation’s largest clean-air fleet (over 2,200 CNG buses) • 450 miles of Metro Rapid Bus System • 131.7 miles of Metro Rail (113 stations) • Average Weekday Boardings (Bus & Rail) – 1.2 million • 513 miles of freeway HOV lanes 2 • New rail and bus rapid transit projects • New highway projects • Enhanced bus and rail service • Local street, signal, bike/pedestrian improvements • Affordable fares for seniors, students and persons with disabilities • Maintenance/replacement of aging system • Bike and pedestrian connections to transit facilities 3 4 5 6 7 • New rail and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) capital projects • Rail yards, rail cars, and start-up buses for new BRT lines • Includes 2% for system-wide connectivity projects such as airports, countywide BRT, regional rail and Union Station 8 Directions Walk to Blue Line and travel to Union Station Southwest Chief to Los Angeles Union Station 9 • Rail transit projects • Crenshaw LAX Transit Project • Regional Connector Transit Project • Westside Purple Line Extension Project • Critical success factors • Financial considerations/risk management • Contract strategy • Lessons learned • Future underground construction • Concluding remarks • Questions and answers 10 11 •Los Angeles Basin •Faults •Hydrocarbons •Groundwater •Seismicity •Methane and Hydrogen Sulfide 12 •Crenshaw LAX Transit Project •Regional Connector Transit Project •Westside Purple Line Extension Project • Section 1 • Section 2 • Section 3 13 • 13.7 km Light Rail • 8 Stations • Aerial Grade Separations, Below Grade, At-Grade Construction • Maintenance Facility Yard • $1.3 Billion Construction Contract Awarded to Walsh / Shea J.V.
  • Land Use Element Designates the General Distribution and Location Patterns of Such Uses As Housing, Business, Industry, and Open Space

    Land Use Element Designates the General Distribution and Location Patterns of Such Uses As Housing, Business, Industry, and Open Space

    CIRCULATION ELEMENT CITY OF HAWTHORNE GENERAL PLAN Adopted April, 1990 Prepared by: Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc. 1028 North Lake Avenue, Suite 107 Pasadena, California 91104 Revision Table Date Case # Resolution # 07/23/2001 2001GP01 6675 06/28/2005 2005GP03 & 04 6967 12/09/2008 2008GP03 7221 06/26/2012 2012GP01 7466 12/04/2015 2015GP02 7751 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. Introduction to the Circulation Element 1 Purpose of this Element 1 Relation to Other General Plan Elements 1 II. Existing Conditions 2 Freeways 2 Local Vehicular Circulation and Street Classification 3 Transit Systems 4 Para-transit Systems 6 Transportation System Management 6 TSM Strategies 7 Non-motorized Circulation 7 Other Circulation Related Topics 8 III. Issues and Opportunities 10 IV. Circulation Element Goals and Policies 11 V. Crenshaw Station Active Transportation Plan 23 Circulation Element March 1989 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page Figure1: Street Classification 17 Figure 2: Traffic Volume Map 18 Figure 3: Roadway Standards 19 Figure 4: Truck Routes 20 Figure 5: Level of Service 21 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Definitions of Level-of-Service 22 Circulation Element March 1989 SECTION I - INTRODUCTION TO THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT Circulation and transportation systems are one of the most important of all urban systems in determining the overall structure and form of the areas they service. The basic purpose of a transportation network within the City of Hawthorne is the provision of an efficient, safe, and serviceable framework which enables people to move among various sections of the city in order to work, shop, or spend leisure hours.

  • Metro Public Hearing Pamphlet

    Proposed Service Changes Metro will hold a series of six virtual on proposed major service changes to public hearings beginning Wednesday, Metro’s bus service. Approved changes August 19 through Thursday, August 27, will become effective December 2020 2020 to receive community input or later. How to Participate By Phone: Other Ways to Comment: Members of the public can call Comments sent via U.S Mail should be addressed to: 877.422.8614 Metro Service Planning & Development and enter the corresponding extension to listen Attn: NextGen Bus Plan Proposed to the proceedings or to submit comments by phone in their preferred language (from the time Service Changes each hearing starts until it concludes). Audio and 1 Gateway Plaza, 99-7-1 comment lines with live translations in Mandarin, Los Angeles, CA 90012-2932 Spanish, and Russian will be available as listed. Callers to the comment line will be able to listen Comments must be postmarked by midnight, to the proceedings while they wait for their turn Thursday, August 27, 2020. Only comments to submit comments via phone. Audio lines received via the comment links in the agendas are available to listen to the hearings without will be read during each hearing. being called on to provide live public comment Comments via e-mail should be addressed to: via phone. [email protected] Online: Attn: “NextGen Bus Plan Submit your comments online via the Public Proposed Service Changes” Hearing Agendas. Agendas will be posted at metro.net/about/board/agenda Facsimiles should be addressed as above and sent to: at least 72 hours in advance of each hearing.
  • Torrance Bus Service Reliability and Improvement Strategies

    Torrance Bus Service Reliability and Improvement Strategies

    TORRANCE BUS SERVICE RELIABILITY AND IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES A Project Presented to the Faculty of California State Polytechnic University, Pomona In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master In Urban and Regional Planning By Jose M. Perez 2019 i SIGNATURE PAGE PROJECT: TORRANCE BUS SERVICE RELIABILITY AND IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES AUTHOR: Jose M. Perez DATE SUBMITTED: Spring 2019 Department of Urban and Regional Planning Dr. Alvaro M. Huerta Project Committee Chair Professor of Urban Planning Richard Zimmer Committee Member Lecturer of Urban Planning David Mach Senior Transportation Planner Torrance Transit i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author thanks the Torrance Transit Employees for the data they furnished and their participation in the client project, especially Senior Transportation Planner David Mach. The author would also like to thank the City of Torrance for providing information on future development and specific goals of their circulation plan. Special thanks to Dr. Alvaro M. Huerta and Professor Richard Zimmer for their help and guidance in completing the client project. i ABSTRACT A city’s transportation infrastructure directly affects the mobility of the people, goods, and services, of all who live within its’ limits. Bus transit lines are a key element of a balanced transportation system that can improve or detract from the quality of life of its’ populous. Transit networks that are poorly implemented eventually become impractical and difficult to maintain; and thus, a burden upon the city it’s meant to help. In addition the service reliability of a transit line is critical to both the transit agency and its users in order to maintain a healthy transportation system.
  • Joint International Light Rail Conference

    Joint International Light Rail Conference

    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH Number E-C145 July 2010 Joint International Light Rail Conference Growth and Renewal April 19–21, 2009 Los Angeles, California Cosponsored by Transportation Research Board American Public Transportation Association TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2010 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OFFICERS Chair: Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington Vice Chair: Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore Division Chair for NRC Oversight: C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2010–2011 TECHNICAL ACTIVITIES COUNCIL Chair: Robert C. Johns, Associate Administrator and Director, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts Technical Activities Director: Mark R. Norman, Transportation Research Board Jeannie G. Beckett, Director of Operations, Port of Tacoma, Washington, Marine Group Chair Cindy J. Burbank, National Planning and Environment Practice Leader, PB, Washington, D.C., Policy and Organization Group Chair Ronald R. Knipling, Principal, safetyforthelonghaul.com, Arlington, Virginia, System Users Group Chair Edward V. A. Kussy, Partner, Nossaman, LLP, Washington, D.C., Legal Resources Group Chair Peter B. Mandle, Director, Jacobs Consultancy, Inc., Burlingame, California, Aviation Group Chair Mary Lou Ralls, Principal, Ralls Newman, LLC, Austin, Texas, Design and Construction Group Chair Daniel L. Roth, Managing Director, Ernst & Young Orenda Corporate Finance, Inc., Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Rail Group Chair Steven Silkunas, Director of Business Development, Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Public Transportation Group Chair Peter F. Swan, Assistant Professor of Logistics and Operations Management, Pennsylvania State, Harrisburg, Middletown, Pennsylvania, Freight Systems Group Chair Katherine F.
  • SCAG Final 2021 FTIP Technical Appendix Volume III of III Part A

    SCAG Final 2021 FTIP Technical Appendix Volume III of III Part A

    FINAL 2021 FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TECHNICAL APPENDIX VOLUME III OF III/PART A FY 2020/21 - 2025/26 March 2021 REGIONAL COUNCIL OFFICERS President Rex Richardson, City of Long Beach First Vice President Clint Lorimore, City of Eastvale Second Vice President Jan C. Harnik, Riverside County Transportation Commission Immediate Past President Alan D. Wapner, San Bernardino County Transportation Authority MEMBERS Imperial County VISION Luis Plancarte, County of Imperial Cheryl Viegas-Walker, El Centro Southern California’s Catalyst Los Angeles County for a Brighter Future. Kathryn Barger, County of Los Angeles Paula Devine, Glendale Hector Andres Pacheco, San Fernando Holly Mitchell, County of Los Angeles Margaret E. Finlay, Duarte Curren D. Price, Jr., Los Angeles Cindy Allen, Long Beach Alex Fisch, Culver City Nithya Raman, Los Angeles Adele Andrade-Stadler, Alhambra Eric Garcetti, Los Angeles Rita Ramirez, Victorville Sean Ashton, Downey James Gazeley, Lomita Rex Richardson, Long Beach* MISSION Bob Blumenfield, Los Angeles Ray Hamada, Bellflower Mark Ridley-Thomas, Los Angeles Mike Bonin, Los Angeles Marqueece Harris-Dawson, Los Angeles Monica Rodriguez, Los Angeles To foster innovative regional Drew Boyles, El Segundo Mark E. Henderson, Gardena Ali Saleh, Bell Joe Buscaino, Los Angeles Paul Koretz, Los Angeles Tim Sandoval, Pomona solutions that improve the lives Juan Carrillo, Palmdale John Lee, Los Angeles David J. Shapiro, Calabasas Gilbert Cedillo, Los Angeles Steven Ly, Rosemead José Luis Solache, Lynwood of Southern Californians through Jonathan C. Curtis, La Canada Flintridge Jorge Marquez, Covina Steve Tye, Diamond Bar Kevin de Leon, Los Angeles Nury Martinez, Los Angeles Frank Aurelio Yokoyama, Cerritos inclusive collaboration, visionary Steve De Ruse, La Mirada Mitch O’Farrell, Los Angeles planning, regional advocacy, Orange County Donald Wagner, County of Orange Michael C.
  • Line 744 (12/15/19) -- Metro Rapid

    Line 744 (12/15/19) -- Metro Rapid

    Saturday, Sunday and Holiday Effective Dec 15 2019 744 Northbound on Van Nuys (Approximate Times) Southbound on Van Nuys (Approximate Times) SHERMAN VAN NUYS PANORAMA PACOIMA PACOIMA PANORAMA VAN NUYS SHERMAN OAKS CITY CITY OAKS 5 6 7 8 8 7 6 5 Sepulveda & Van Nuys Orange Van Nuys & Van Nuys & Van Nuys & Van Nuys & Van Nuys Orange Sepulveda & Ventura B Line Station Roscoe Glenoaks Glenoaks Roscoe Line Station Ventura 6:02A 6:17A 6:28A 6:50A A5:12A 5:27A 5:36A 5:46A 6:36 6:51 7:02 7:25 A5:36 5:55 6:06 6:16 7:10 7:26 7:39 8:03 A6:06 6:25 6:36 6:46 7:40 7:57 8:10 8:34 6:35 6:54 7:05 7:16 8:10 8:28 8:42 9:07 7:05 7:24 7:35 7:46 8:40 8:58 9:12 9:37 7:33 7:53 8:06 8:17 9:10 9:28 9:43 10:09 8:00 8:21 8:34 8:46 9:40 10:00 10:15 10:42 8:30 8:51 9:04 9:16 10:10 10:30 10:45 11:12 9:00 9:21 9:34 9:46 10:40 11:00 11:15 11:42 9:30 9:51 10:04 10:16 11:10 11:30 11:45 12:12P 9:59 10:21 10:34 10:46 11:40 12:00P 12:16P 12:43 10:28 10:50 11:04 11:16 12:10P 12:30 12:46 1:14 10:58 11:20 11:34 11:46 12:40 1:00 1:16 1:44 11:27 11:49 12:03P 12:16P 1:10 1:30 1:46 2:14 11:57 12:19P 12:33 12:46 1:40 2:00 2:16 2:44 12:27P 12:49 1:03 1:16 2:10 2:30 2:45 3:13 12:55 1:18 1:33 1:46 2:40 3:00 3:16 3:44 1:25 1:48 2:03 2:16 3:10 3:30 3:46 4:14 1:56 2:18 2:33 2:46 3:40 4:00 4:16 4:44 2:27 2:49 3:03 3:16 4:10 4:30 4:45 5:13 2:57 3:19 3:33 3:46 4:40 5:00 5:15 5:43 3:27 3:49 4:03 4:16 5:10 5:30 5:44 6:12 3:58 4:19 4:33 4:46 5:40 6:00 6:14 6:41 4:29 4:50 5:04 5:16 6:10 6:29 6:43 7:10 5:00 5:21 5:34 5:46 6:40 6:59 7:13 7:40 5:30 5:51 6:04 6:16 7:10 7:29 7:43 8:09 6:00 6:21 6:34
  • Calendar Year 2019 Report of State Safety Oversight Activities for Rail Fixed Guideway Transportation Systems in California

    Calendar Year 2019 Report of State Safety Oversight Activities for Rail Fixed Guideway Transportation Systems in California

    CALENDAR YEAR 2019 REPORT OF STATE SAFETY OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES FOR RAIL FIXED GUIDEWAY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS IN CALIFORNIA California Public Roger Clugston, Director Utilities Commission Rail Safety Division March 15, 2020 California Public Utilities Commission – Rail Safety Division CALENDAR YEAR 2019 ANNUAL REPORT –STATE SAFETY OVERSIGHT OF RAIL FIXED GUIDEWAY SYSTEMS TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................. 1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................. 2 OVERVIEW OF CPUC’S RAIL TRANSIT SAFETY OVERSIGHT PROGRAM ............................. 4 SUMMARY OF OVERSIGHT ACTIVITIES OF ALL RAIL TRANSIT AGENCIES FROM OCTOBER 23, 2018 TO DECEMBER 31, 2019 .................................................................................. 7 ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS .................................................................................................................... 20 SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES FOR ALL FTA REGULATED RAIL TRANSIT AGENCIES FROM OCTOBER 23, 2018, TO DECEMBER 31, 2019 ............................................................................... 22 BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT ................................................................................................ 22 LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY ............................. 27 NORTH [SAN DIEGO] COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT ........................................................................