Final PEROW Alternatives Analysis Section 7
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Metro Bus and Metro Rail System
Approximate frequency in minutes Approximate frequency in minutes Approximate frequency in minutes Approximate frequency in minutes Metro Bus Lines East/West Local Service in other areas Weekdays Saturdays Sundays North/South Local Service in other areas Weekdays Saturdays Sundays Limited Stop Service Weekdays Saturdays Sundays Special Service Weekdays Saturdays Sundays Approximate frequency in minutes Line Route Name Peaks Day Eve Day Eve Day Eve Line Route Name Peaks Day Eve Day Eve Day Eve Line Route Name Peaks Day Eve Day Eve Day Eve Line Route Name Peaks Day Eve Day Eve Day Eve Weekdays Saturdays Sundays 102 Walnut Park-Florence-East Jefferson Bl- 200 Alvarado St 5-8 11 12-30 10 12-30 12 12-30 302 Sunset Bl Limited 6-20—————— 603 Rampart Bl-Hoover St-Allesandro St- Local Service To/From Downtown LA 29-4038-4531-4545454545 10-12123020-303020-3030 Exposition Bl-Coliseum St 201 Silverlake Bl-Atwater-Glendale 40 40 40 60 60a 60 60a 305 Crosstown Bus:UCLA/Westwood- Colorado St Line Route Name Peaks Day Eve Day Eve Day Eve 3045-60————— NEWHALL 105 202 Imperial/Wilmington Station Limited 605 SANTA CLARITA 2 Sunset Bl 3-8 9-10 15-30 12-14 15-30 15-25 20-30 Vernon Av-La Cienega Bl 15-18 18-20 20-60 15 20-60 20 40-60 Willowbrook-Compton-Wilmington 30-60 — 60* — 60* — —60* Grande Vista Av-Boyle Heights- 5 10 15-20 30a 30 30a 30 30a PRINCESSA 4 Santa Monica Bl 7-14 8-14 15-18 12-18 12-15 15-30 15 108 Marina del Rey-Slauson Av-Pico Rivera 4-8 15 18-60 14-17 18-60 15-20 25-60 204 Vermont Av 6-10 10-15 20-30 15-20 15-30 12-15 15-30 312 La Brea -
Gateway District SPECIFIC PLAN
CITY OF SOUTH GATE Gateway District FACT SHEET SPECIFIC PLAN Upcoming Opportunities for Community CITY OF SOUTH GATE Participation South Gate’s collaboration with business and residential communities is of paramount importance to the development of the Specific Plan. The City will host three community meetings between January and Fall 2016. 1 Community Meeting 1: Project Initiation Meeting Wednesday, January 27, 2016 Gateway The focus of the initial meeting is to increase project awareness, provide interested residents and business groups information about the Specific Plan’s purpose, study goals and timeline, and to gather feedback on the TOD vision for South Gate. 2 Community Workshop 2: Project Specific Workshop Spring/Summer 2016 The second meeting will be a workshop where the information gathered from the first meeting, as well District as technical work, will be shared. Participants will provide feedback and input on preliminary land use and design scenarios, including public access and open space. Information gathered from the SPECIFIC PLAN workshop will help define the Specific Plan’s goals and policies, and will be used to develop the Public Review Draft Specific Plan. Community Meeting 3: Public Review Draft Specific Plan 3 Summer/Fall 2016 The third meeting will provide the community an opportunity to review and comment on the Public Review Draft Specific Plan. Participants will have the chance to review key components of the Specific Plan, such as site design concepts, proposed land uses, pedestrian- and transit-oriented concepts, and strategies for public access and open space. Comments will be documented and be responded to in the Final Gateway Specific Plan. -
City Council Agenda Report
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: 4/12/2021 ITEM NO: 15 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council SUBJECT: Approval of a Letter to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority in Support of Federal Funding for the West Santa Ana Branch Light Rail Project FROM: Karen Lee, Management Analyst REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Melissa Burke, Administrative Manager HongDao Nguyen, City Attorney William Rawlings, City Manager RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign, and direct staff to submit, the attached letter to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. BACKGROUND: The West Santa Ana Branch (WSAB) light rail line is a substantial public works and transportation project that will have a permanent impact on the region. This project will have tremendous impact on the City as the City’s planned station location in the Downtown will be the line’s terminus. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) is overseeing this project. During the January 12, 2021 meeting of the WSAB City Manager Technical Advisory Committee, and the board meeting of the Orangeline Development Authority/Eco-Rapid Transit on January 13, 2021, Metro staff reported that it intends to lobby for federal funding for the WSAB project to help pay the estimated cost of $6.3 to $6.5 billion in 2018 dollars based on 5% design level plus the addition of project revisions. The project costs will be updated this month based on the 15% design level. 1 ANALYSIS: Metro has requested that cities along the WSAB corridor provide letters in support of the WSAB project and Metro’s efforts to pursue federal funding for this project. -
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 -
Oei Office of Extraordinary Innovation
Tab 9 INNOVATION Defining the Problem Problem: Mobility in Los Angeles County is not working Thesis: We need to do things very differently to reduce Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) use Proposed solutions: Set a course, accelerate projects, and try new stuff 2 “We have to have stretch goals that area realistic” 3 ROLE OF METRO STRATEGIC PLAN • Foundation that aligns all plans, programs, and services to achieve a common vision • Establishes mission, vision, and goals to be adopted by other plans (e.g. Long Range Transportation Plan, NextGen Bus Study, etc.) • Sets principles for making decisions and conducting business 4 STRATEGIC MOBILITY: SUPPLY • Increase capacity for non-SOV modes • Improve quality of existing transit system Common Interest 5 STRATEGIC MOBILITY: DEMAND • Manage demand • Pricing beyond transit fares • CongestionCommon pricingInterest • Regulate TNCs 6 “This is a really innovative idea but we can’t do it. It’s never been done before” 7 MicroTransit Pilot Can Metro increase customer satisfaction & attract new riders? > A cross between a pooled ride and a shuttle bus > Meets increasing expectation for convenience > Expands FMLM solutions > Flexible and seamless o Integrated with transit system o Serves non-linear travel On Demand | Dynamically Routed Data Driven | Corner to Corner 8 “If we improve our service more people will use it and we can’t afford that.” 9 Mobility on Demand Partner with a transportation network company to provide better and more equitable access to 3 pilot transit stations “We could have thought of that on our own.” 11 Unsolicited Proposals: Background In February 2016, Metro opened its doors to the private sector, at an Industry> Pledged our Forumcommitment. -
CPY Document
FORM GEN,, ',GOAIR".'/82) CITY OF LOS ANGELES IN, ~R-DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDl:..tE Date: December 4, 2007 To: The Honorable City Council c/o City Clerk, Room 395, City Hall Attention:~l.7~ Wendy Greuel, Chair, Transportation Committee From: rRita L. Robinson, General Manager Department of Transportation Subject: USDOT CONGESTION REDUCTION DEMONSTRATION INITIATIVE- CONGESTION PRICING (CF 07-3754) As directed by the motion (CF 07-3754) presented by Councilmember Wendy Greuel (CD 2), the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) has prepared this report regarding the recent announcement by the United States Department of Transportation (US DOT) on the availability of federal funds for Congestion-Reduction Demonstration Initiatives. The motion directed LADOT to identify projects that would be eligible for grant funding under this federal program and to work with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) to prepare a grant application to be submitted to USDOT by the deadline of December 31, 2007. RECOMMENDATION AUTHORIZE LADOT to partner with Metro and Caltrans in the preparation of a joint Congestion-Reduction Demonstration Initiatives application package to the USDOT with consideration of the following overall project elements including complementary City components which total approximately $35 million: 1. Conversion of the existing Interstate 110 (Harbor Transitway) High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes to High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes (Caltrans to determine scope and cost) 2. Grade separation of the northern terminus of proposed HOT lanes on the Harbor Transitway over Adams Boulevard onto Figueroa Street (Caltrans to determine feasibility, scope and cost) 3. Enhancement of Transit Service along Harbor Transitway from Artesia Transit Center to Downtown Civic Center (Metro to determine feasibility, scope and cost) 4. -
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. -
2006 C.3 Harbor Subdivision Transit Analysis
1JiIi~ ENGINEERS ?LAo~NERS •••••• ECONOMISTS ........~ro'" WilburSmith ASSOC, ... TlS Metro ---34937 TF OCT 02 2007 870 .H377 2006 c.3 Harbor Subdivision Transit Analysis Final Report Submitted to: The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Trausportation Authority Prepared by: Wilhur Smith Associates UltraSystems Environmental RAW International December 22, 2006 • Executive Summary HARBOR SUBDIVISION TRANSIT ANALYSIS ANALYSIS BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE In 1992, the former Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (LAcrq purchased the majority of the Harbor Subdivision, the mainline of the former Atchison Topc:ka & Santa Fe Railw:ay (ATSF or Santa Fe) ~tween downtown Los Angeles and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. As part of that agreement, ATSF retained the right to provide freight rail servia on the portion of the line owned by the LAcre, and LAcre retained the right to operate passenger service on the line. Today, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), the succ('ssor railroad to the ATSF, still operates freight trains on the line, although the total is a small fraction ofwhat it was at Ute time of the purchase. Neither LACfC nor its successor agency, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), ran any passenger service on the line. The line studied appears as Figure £5.1 on the following page. With this analysis, Metro has attempted to investigate the feasibility of the potential deployment of various transit modes on its portion of the Harbor Subdivision. The attempt has been to make use of as much of the 26.36-mile right-of-way as may be practical, realizing that some sections of the line run through primarily industrial land uses. -
City Council Agenda Report
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: 11/9/2020 ITEM NO: 7 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council SUBJECT: Informational Report Regarding the 3% Local Contribution Required Under Measure M to Fund the West Santa Ana Branch Light Rail Line FROM: Karen Lee, Management Analyst REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Melissa Burke, Administrative Manager Christi Hogin, City Attorney William Rawlings, City Manager RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the report. BACKGROUND: Los Angeles County voters approved Measure M on November 8, 2016, which implemented a permanent county-wide sales tax increase to fund projects to greatly expand the County’s public transit system, including new rail lines, roads, and related infrastructure. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) administers Measure M funds. Funding for the West Santa Ana Branch (WSAB) line is provided by Measure M. One of Measure M’s requirements is a local contribution by jurisdictions for constructing a rail project with a new station within their boundaries. The rationale for the contribution is that local jurisdictions receive a direct benefit due to the increased access to transit service that is above and beyond the project’s benefit to the County as a whole. The contribution amount is 3% of the project’s total costs at the 30% level of its final design. It is capped at this amount for local contribution purposes, even if the total project cost increases. This amount is then divided by the number of new rail stations constructed on the line. Jurisdictions located within a one-half mile area of the new station will proportionally share the costs based on each jurisdiction’s share of the area. -
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. -
BNSF Harbor Subdivision
South Bay Cities Railroad Study BNSF Harbor Subdivision Final Report Prepared for: Southern California Association of Governments In Coordination with South Bay Cities Council of Governments The preparation of this report was financed in part through grants from the United States Department of Transportation – Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration – under provisions of the Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century. Additional financial assistance was provided by the California State Department of Transportation. Prepared by: Wilbur Smith Associates Schiermeyer Consulting Services Cheryl Downey February 28, 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary Project Overview .................................................................................................... ES-1 How the Study was done......................................................................................... ES-1 Recommendations................................................................................................... ES-2 Next Steps ............................................................................................................... ES-2 1 Introduction 1.1 Purpose of the Study........................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Study Process................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Agencies Consulted.......................................................................................... 1-3 1.4 Legal Framework -
1981 Caltrans Inventory of Pacific Electric Routes
1981 Inventory of PACIFIC ELECTRIC ROUTES I J..,. I ~ " HE 5428 . red by I58 ANGELES - DISTRICT 7 - PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BRANCH rI P37 c.2 " ' archive 1981 INVENTORY OF PACIFIC ELECTRIC ROUTES • PREPARED BY CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) DISTRICT 07 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BRANCH FEBRUARY 1982 • TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 Pacific Electric Railway Company Map 3a Inventory Map 3b II. NQR'I'HIRN AND EASTERN DISTRICTS 4 A. San Bernardino Line 6 B. Monrovia-Glendora Line 14 C. Alhambra-San Gabriel Line 19 D. Pasadena Short Line 21 E. Pasadena Oak Knoll Line 23 F. Sierra Madre Line 25 G. South Pasadena Line 27 H. North Lake Avenue Line 30 10 North Fair Oaks Avenue Line 31 J. East Colorado Street Line 32 K. Pomona-Upland Line 34 L. San Bernardino-Riverside Line 36 M. Riverside-Corona Line 41 III. WESTERN DISTRICT 45 A. Glendale-Burbank Line 47 B. Hollywood Line Segment via Hill Street 52 C. South Hollywood-Sherman Line 55 D. Subway Hollywood Line 58 i TABLE OF CONTENTS (Contd. ) -PAGE III. WESTERN DISTRICT (Conta. ) E. San Fernando valley Line 61 F. Hollywood-Venice Line 68 o. Venice Short Line 71 H. Santa Monica via Sawtelle Line 76 I. westgate Line 80 J. Santa Monica Air Line 84 K. Soldier's Home Branch Line 93 L. Redondo Beach-Del Rey Line 96 M. Inglewood Line 102 IV. SOUTHIRN DISTRICT 106 A. Long Beach Line 108 B. American Avenue-North Long Beach Line 116 c. Newport-Balboa Line 118 D. E1 Segundo Line 123 E. San Pedro via Dominguez Line 129 F.