Nordhoff Street
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Joint Development Program
POTENTIAL JOINT DEVELOPMENT SITES North Hollywood: 17.40 Acres Universal City: 12.00 Acres Metro Orange Line Sepulveda Station: 12.48 Acres Chatsworth Metrolink Station: 12.00 Acres Metro Gold Line Eastern Extension: Various Parcels Taylor Yard: 23.00 Acres Blue Line Artesia Station 6.4 acres Bus Divisions (Div. 7; El Monte) Metro Orange Line Balboa Station 2.2 acres Vermont/Beverly 0.5 acre Vermont/Sunset 0.7 acre North Hollywood Station Metro Red Line Site Description The project site consists of two separate parcels adjacent to Metro Red Line North Hollywood Station: • Parcel 1 is located east of Lankershim Boulevard and bounded by Cumpston Street on the north, South Chandler Boulevard on the south and Fair Avenue on the east. It consists of approximately 10.45 acres and is currently used for the North Hollywood Station entrance, a 14-bay bus layover site and a 1,101-space auto parking surface lot. •Parcel 2 is located west of Lankershim Boulevard and bounded by South Chandler Boulevard on the north, Bakman Avenue on the west and Weddington Avenue on the south. It is approximately 1.8 acres and currently serves Metro construction-related uses. Though not directly connected to Metro Red Line, this parcel can be directly linked to the station through an existing knockout panel. North Hollywood Station Metro Red Line Zoning • Parcel 1: C2-2D-CA • Parcel 2: C4-2D-CA • Parcel 3: PF • Parcel 4: C21a Area Context Located in the North Hollywood Redevelopment Project Area Major projects in the area include: • NoHo Academy completed in 1991 - a mixed-use project including an eight-story office and retail building, the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences entertainment complex, and a 250-unit multi-family residential project • NoHo Commons - a 23-acre mixed-use project consisting of approximately 1.2 million square feet (sf) including 810 residential units, 228,000 s.f. -
Los Angeles Orange Line
Metro Orange Line BRT Project Evaluation OCTOBER 2011 FTA Report No. 0004 Federal Transit Administration PREPARED BY Jennifer Flynn, Research Associate Cheryl Thole, Research Associate Victoria Perk, Senior Research Associate Joseph Samus, Graduate Research Assistant Caleb Van Nostrand, Graduate Research Assistant National Bus Rapid Transit Institute Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida CCOOVVEERR PPHHOTOOTO LLooss AAnnggeelleess CCoouunnttyy MMeettrrooppololiittanan TTransransppoorrttaattioionn AAuutthhoorriittyy DDIISCSCLLAAIIMMEERR TThhiis ds dooccuumemennt it is is inntteennddeed ad as a ts teecchhnniiccaal al assssiissttaanncce pe prroodduucctt. I. It it is dsiiss ssdeemmiinnaatteed udnn ddueer tr thhe sepp oosnnssoorrsshhiip opf tf tohhe Ue..SS U.. DDeeppaarrttmemennt ot of Tf Trraannssppoorrttaattiioon in in tn thhe ie inntteerreesst ot of if innffoorrmamattiioon enxxcc ehhaannggee. T. Thhe Uenn iittUeed Sdttaa Sttees Gsoo vvGeerrnnmemennt atss ssauumemes nso nlo liiaabbiilliittyy ffoor ir itts cs coonntteenntts os or ur usse te thheerreeooff. T. Thhe Ue Unniitteed Sd Sttaattees Gs Goovveerrnnmemennt dtoo eeds nsoo tn et ennddoorrsse perroo pdduucctts osf mfo aa nnmuuffaaccttuurreerrss. T. Trraadde oerr o mamannuuffaaccttuurreerrss’ n’ naamemes as appppeeaar her herreeiin sn soolleelly by beeccaauusse te thheey ayrre a ceoo nncssiiddeerreed edssss eeennttiiaal tl to tohh et oebb jjeeoccttiivve oef tf tohhiis rs reeppoorrtt.. Metro Orange Line BRT Project Evaluation OCTOBER 2011 FTA Report No. 0004 PREPARED BY Jennifer Flynn, Research Associate Cheryl Thole, Research Associate Victoria Perk, Senior Research Associate Joseph Samus, Graduate Research Assistant Caleb Van Nostrand, Graduate Research Assistant National Bus Rapid Transit Institute Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CUT100 Tampa, FL 33620 SPONSORED BY Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation U.S. -
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. -
Proudly Serving Southern California for 20 Years Message from the Board of Directors 1
20th Anniversary Report Proudly serving Southern California for 20 years Message from the Board of Directors 1 1 Who we are 2 2 How it all began 4 3 Metrolink steps up in Northridge earthquake aftermath 8 4 Holiday Toy Express® comes to town 10 5 Paving the way for more connections 12 6 Tragedy strikes the Metrolink family, sparks safety innovation 14 7 Chatsworth collision inspires safety transformation 18 8 Focusing on customers 30 9 Reducing emissions and congestion one car at a time 38 10 What’s next 42 Timeline 46 System maps 48 Sources 50 ii Message from the Board of Directors On Oct. 26, 2012, Metrolink celebrates 20 years of providing transportation solutions to Southern Californians. In 1988, Southern California commuters voiced a need for commuter rail service as an alternative to the widespread gridlock in our region, and transportation officials from five counties banded together to make it happen. Metrolink has grown tremendously, from transporting around 939,000 riders during fiscal year 1992-1993 to more than 11.9 million riders in fiscal year 2011-2012. Sixty-five percent of passengers surveyed after Metrolink’s first year of service said that they drove alone before Metrolink’s debut. Today an estimated 8.5 million weekday automobile trips are removed from the road each year because of the service Metrolink provides. Throughout its history when the public needed a solution, Metrolink rose to the challenge, whether that meant extending service lines like we did after the 1994 Northridge earthquake when freeways collapsed or introducing Bike Cars in 2011 to accommodate growing demand for bicycle storage on trains or adding service on the Ventura County and Antelope Valley lines during the Interstate 405 closures in 2011 and 2012. -
Fiscal Year 2019-20 Proposed Budget
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FISCAL YEAR 2019-20 PROPOSED BUDGET Including Forecast for FY2020-21 thru FY2023-24 For Board Consideration & Public Comment Final Adopted Budget will be available 60 days after Board Adoption Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Orange County Transportation Authority Riverside County Transportation Commission San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Ventura County Transportation Commission June 28, 2019 1 This page intentionally left blank June 28, 2019 2 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY FY2019-20 BUDGET TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1: Executive Summary ....................................................................... 11 1.1 A Message from the Chief Executive Officer – To be added ............ 11 1.2 Introduction – To be added .............................................................. 11 1.3 Metrolink in Perspective – To be added ........................................... 11 1.4 Metrolink in Comparison – To be added .......................................... 11 1.5 Accomplishments in FY2018-19 – To be added ............................... 11 1.6 Objectives for FY2019-20 ................................................................ 11 1.7 FY2019-20 Budget in Brief ............................................................... 12 1.8 Key FY2019-20Budget Information .................................................. 12 1.9 The FY2019-20 Operational Budget Statistics ................................. 13 1.10 Administrative Requirements .......................................................... -
SCRRA Strategic Assessment
SCRRA Strategic Assessment Southern California Regional Rail Authority January 26, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ES Page 1 1.0 Study Purpose and Methodology 1.1 1.1 Purpose 1.1 1.2 Methodology 1.1 1.2.1 The Current Metrolink System and the Surrounding Environment 1.1 1.2.2 Definition of Future Operating Scenarios 1.2 1.2.3 Identification of Long- Term Direction 1.4 1.2.4 Challenges 1.4 2.0 Current System and Baseline Capacity 2.1 2.1 Formation of Metrolink 2.1 2.2 Current Operations 2.2 2.3 Person Throughput on Metrolink Compared with Freeways 2.4 2.4 Organizational Summary 2.5 2.5 Mission Statement and Management Philosophy 2.5 2.6 The SCRRA Budget 2.7 2.7 SCRRA Operating Formulae 2.7 2.8 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats, and Unknown Outcomes 2.9 2.9 Constraints on System Growth 2.10 3.0 Metrolink System Safety Program 3.1 3.1 System Safety Program Plan 3.1 3.2 Sealed Corridor Concept 3.2 3.3 Grade Separations 3.5 3.4 Crash Energy Management 3.5 4.0 Public Communications 4.1 4.1 Methods for Determining Customer Communications Needs 4.1 4.1.1 Onboard Surveys 4.1 4.1.2 Rider Panel 4.1 4.1.3 Focus Groups 4.1 4.1.4 Customer Comments 4.1 4.1.5 Industry-wide Research Studies 4.2 4.1.6 Stakeholder Communications 4.2 4.2 Preferences and Expectations for Transit Information 4.2 4.2.1 Printed Materials 4.2 4.2.2 Call Center 4.3 4.2.3 Website 4.3 4.2.4 Station Signage 4.5 a) Static Signage 4.5 b) Dynamic Signage 4.6 4.2.5 In-vehicle information 4.7 4.2.6 Media Relations 4.7 4.3 Short Term Communications Outlook (2006-2015) -
Metro Orange Line Weekday Peak Hours Only Metro Orange Line
Monday through Friday Schedule Chatsworth - Warner Center Shuttle Effective Jun 29 2014 Metro Orange Line Weekday Peak Hours Only Metro Orange Line Eastbound (Approximate Times) Westbound (Approximate Times) Eastbound (Approximate Times) Westbound (Approximate Times) CHATSWORTH CANOGA PARK WARNER CENTER WARNER CENTER CANOGA PARK CHATSWORTH Chatsworth Station Canoga Station Warner Center Station Warner Center Station Canoga Station Chatsworth Station 5:35A 5:48A 5:53A 6:00A 6:05A 6:18A CHATSWORTH WARNER CENTER PARK CANOGA WINNETKA NUYS VAN NORTH HOLLYWOOD NORTH HOLLYWOOD GLEN VALLEY NUYS VAN TARZANA PARK CANOGA WARNER CENTER CHATSWORTH 6:05 6:18 6:23 6:30 6:35 6:48 6:29 6:42 6:47 6:48 6:53 7:06 6:54 7:07 7:12 7:13 7:18 7:31 7:12 7:25 7:30 7:31 7:36 7:49 7:44 7:57 8:02 8:03 8:08 8:21 7:56 8:09 8:14 8:16 8:21 8:34 A B 8:39 8:52 8:57 9:02 9:07 9:20 8:55 9:08 9:13 9:15 9:20 9:33 SHUTTLE TRIPS DO NOT OPERATE MIDDAY SHUTTLE TRIPS DO NOT OPERATE MIDDAY Chatsworth Station Warner Center Station Canoga Station College Pierce Station Balboa Station Nuys Van Station North Hollywood Station North Hollywood Station College Valley Station Sepulveda Station Reseda Station Canoga Station Warner Center Station Chatsworth Station 2:00P 2:14P 2:19P 2:25P 2:30P 2:43P ADDITIONAL PEAK HOUR TRIPS SHOWN IN CHATSWORTH TO WARNER CENTER ADDITIONAL PEAK HOUR TRIPS SHOWN IN CHATSWORTH TO WARNER CENTER 2:52 3:06 3:11 3:14 3:19 3:32 3:19 3:33 3:38 3:54 3:59 4:12 SHUTTLE SECTION OF THIS TIMETABLE SHUTTLE SECTION OF THIS TIMETABLE 3:42 3:56 4:01 4:06 4:11 4:24 — 3:41A 3:46A -
Passenger Rail
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PASSENGER RAIL SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TECHNICAL REPORT DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE 2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 3 ANALYTICAL APPROACH 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS 6 STRATEGIES 27 NEXT STEPS 44 CONCLUSION 45 TECHNICAL REPORT PASSENGER RAIL DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT connectsocal.org EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM This Connect SoCal Passenger Rail report lays out a vision of passenger rail services for the SCAG Region for the next three decades. It demonstrates Passenger Rail the progress that has been made over the last two decades in terms of growing ridership, new rail services, capital improvements and new funding opportunities. It demonstrates the regional importance and significance of passenger rail in the SCAG region, and why growing rail services by increasing frequencies in underserved corridors, as well as establishing service in unserved markets, is crucial to the future mobility and sustainability of our region. The report highlights recent success in establishing new funding opportunities for passenger rail, including the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) and Senate Bill (SB) 1. Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner intercity rail service is benefiting from these new funding opportunities as well as recent institutional arrangements that establish local control for the service. The Southern California Regional Rail Authority’s (SCRRA) Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE) program is an ambitious -
FY 20-21 Transit Needs Assessment
FY 20-21 Transit Needs Assessment Ventura County Transportation Commission Contents List of Figures and Appendices……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2 Appendices .................................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Introduction – What is the Ventura County Transportation Commission? ................................ 2 Chapter 2: What is the Unmet Transit Needs Process? ................................................................................ 2 What is an Unmet Transit Need? .............................................................................................................. 2 .................................................................................................................................................................. 3 What is “Reasonable to Meet”? ............................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 3: Description of TDA-Funded Transit Providers Serving Populations Less than 100,000 and Thousand Oaks .............................................................................................................................................. 4 VCTC Intercity Transit ............................................................................................................................... 4 Valley Express Transit .............................................................................................................................. -
Metro Orange Line BRT Project Evaluation
Metro Orange Line BRT Project Evaluation OCTOBER 2011 FTA Report No. 0004 Federal Transit Administration PREPARED BY Jennifer Flynn, Research Associate Cheryl Thole, Research Associate Victoria Perk, Senior Research Associate Joseph Samus, Graduate Research Assistant Caleb Van Nostrand, Graduate Research Assistant National Bus Rapid Transit Institute Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida COVER PHOTO Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority DISCLAIMER This document is intended as a technical assistance product. It is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products of manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Metro Orange Line BRT Project Evaluation OCTOBER 2011 FTA Report No. 0004 PREPARED BY Jennifer Flynn, Research Associate Cheryl Thole, Research Associate Victoria Perk, Senior Research Associate Joseph Samus, Graduate Research Assistant Caleb Van Nostrand, Graduate Research Assistant National Bus Rapid Transit Institute Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, CUT100 Tampa, FL 33620 SPONSORED BY Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, -
Passenger Rail
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PASSENGER RAIL SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TECHNICAL REPORT ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 3, 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE 2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 3 ANALYTICAL APPROACH 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS 7 STRATEGIES 28 NEXT STEPS 45 CONCLUSION 46 TECHNICAL REPORT PASSENGER RAIL ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 3, 2020 connectsocal.org EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM This Connect SoCal Passenger Rail report lays out a vision of passenger rail services for the SCAG Region for the next three decades. It demonstrates Passenger Rail the progress that has been made over the last two decades in terms of growing ridership, new rail services, capital improvements and new funding opportunities. It demonstrates the regional importance and significance of passenger rail in the SCAG region, and why growing rail services by increasing frequencies in underserved corridors, as well as establishing service in unserved markets, is crucial to the future mobility and sustainability of our region. The report highlights recent success in establishing new funding opportunities for passenger rail, including the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) and Senate Bill (SB) 1. Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner intercity rail service is benefiting from these new funding opportunities as well as recent institutional arrangements that establish local control for the service. The Southern California Regional Rail Authority’s (SCRRA) Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE) program is an ambitious long-term capital improvement program to increase service on most of its lines to 15- and 30-minute frequencies, and SCRRA was recently awarded nearly one billion dollars in TIRCP funds for initial improvements. Finally, the report takes a look at existing conditions; a needs assessment which discusses, among other things, capacity constraints and opportunities for improved connectivity, including rail access to the region’s airports; and rail projects in the pipeline, both under construction and unfunded strategic long-term projects. -
Passenger Rail
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PASSENGER RAIL SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TECHNICAL REPORT DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE 2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 3 ANALYTICAL APPROACH 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS 6 STRATEGIES 27 NEXT STEPS 44 CONCLUSION 45 TECHNICAL REPORT PASSENGER RAIL DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT connectsocal.org EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM This Connect SoCal Passenger Rail report lays out a vision of passenger rail services for the SCAG Region for the next three decades. It demonstrates Passenger Rail the progress that has been made over the last two decades in terms of growing ridership, new rail services, capital improvements and new funding opportunities. It demonstrates the regional importance and significance of passenger rail in the SCAG region, and why growing rail services by increasing frequencies in underserved corridors, as well as establishing service in unserved markets, is crucial to the future mobility and sustainability of our region. The report highlights recent success in establishing new funding opportunities for passenger rail, including the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) and Senate Bill (SB) 1. Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner intercity rail service is benefiting from these new funding opportunities as well as recent institutional arrangements that establish local control for the service. The Southern California Regional Rail Authority’s (SCRRA) Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE) program is an ambitious