LOS ANGELES | Transportation News & Discussion

[202_Cyclist]

Tunnel Planned for California Bullet Train Under Burbank Airport

By Ralph Vartabedian
Los Angeles Times
December 3, 2019


A view of the Burbank airport. It sits in Southern California path of bullet train proposed by the California High-Speed Rail Authority. (Photo via the LA Times)

"The complexity of building a bullet train through Southern California’s urban maze is leading state officials to consider two major additions: a tunnel under the Burbank airport and a project that would help a freight railroad expand its switching yards in the Inland Empire.

Engineering studies reveal potential complications in the $80 billion project that have yet to be fully understood, even as the California High-Speed Rail Authority struggles to complete 119 miles of construction in the Central Valley that is over budget and behind schedule..."

https://www.ttnews.com/articles/burb...tunnel-planned

[numble]

There was a lot of discussion 3 years ago (May 2017) regarding the proposed SR-60 alignment for the extension of the Gold Line. There now appears to be momentum within Metro towards ditching that alignment, after over a decade of study, and start study on something else to serve the San Gabriel Valley. It looks like action will be taken in February 2020.

September 2019: Montebello (which has 2/4 stops on the alignment) abandoned support for the alignment and started supporting only the Washington alignment (which still has a stop in southern Montebello), due to a change in city council members.
https://www.whittierdailynews.com/20...ard-route/amp/

January 14, 2020: draft item for February board meeting indicates Metro staff recommendation to abandon SR-60 alignment and start studying something new

https://twitter.com/numble/status/12...445475840?s=20

January 27, 2020:
This report on the problems with the SR-60 alignment has shown up on the Metro website. Probably will be used to support the staff recommendation to abandon the alignment.
http://libraryarchives.metro.net/DB_...s%20Report.pdf


https://twitter.com/numble/status/12...164622854?s=20

[llamaorama]

I was reading about a plan in China to build “high speed” 100mph metro lines in the pearl river delta megalopolis so that any given suburb would be an hour ride away from any core city.

Imagine if the hsr plan was revised, to accommodate something like that. If billions are needed for a tunnel from LA to Palmdale, why not have it host both intercity trains and fast commuter service?

The benefit towards affordable housing supply would be immense, since there is a lot of desert up in the northern part of LA county that could be developed if it was a 45 minute train ride away.

[plutonicpanda]

Metro back at it cheaping out and fucking up everything. It's one thing if they want to stupidly become anti-freeway but they can not even build proper transit. Both alignments should be built.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by llamaorama

Imagine if the hsr plan was revised, to accommodate something like that. If billions are needed for a tunnel from LA to Palmdale, why not have it host both intercity trains and fast commuter service?

The benefit towards affordable housing supply would be immense, since there is a lot of desert up in the northern part of LA county that could be developed if it was a 45 minute train ride away.

That has been conceptually brought up. The issue is the CHSRA has no prerogative or incentive to plan for such an arrangement as the HSR system is a specific program with a specific mandate, goals, rules, funding etc etc etc etc. Plus Metrolink has never publicly floated the concept. And that's not even getting into whether it's even possible to operate the TPH for HSR plus another service as well through the same tunnel.

[Car(e)-Free LA]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

That has been conceptually brought up. The issue is the CHSRA has no prerogative or incentive to plan for such an arrangement as the HSR system is a specific program with a specific mandate, goals, rules, funding etc etc etc etc. Plus Metrolink has never publicly floated the concept. And that's not even getting into whether it's even possible to operate the TPH for HSR plus another service as well through the same tunnel.

It's almost certainly possible. The tunnel should be able to handle 20 TPH at about 180 MPH. If you allocate 6 TPH (a train every 10 minutes) to Metrolink, that allows for 3 TPH to Las Vegas, 5 TPH (express) to San Francisco, 2 TPH (express to Sacramento), 3 TPH (local) to San Francisco, and 1 TPH (local) to Sacramento. If demand grows, then a Cajon Pass line HAS to be built to relocate the Vegas service and possibly some Northern Ca-IE/SD service. Regardless, Metrolink service to Palmdale is probably capped at 8 TPH, which would allow a maximum of 50,000 daily commuters each way between the Antelope Valley and LA. The key is that there cannot be anny Metrolink stops along the SR14 corridor between Palmdale and Burbank Airport without some very ever and expensive 4-tracking between tunnel portals in Agua Dulce and Canyon Country. Metrolink would also need a dedicated subfleet of electric 180 MPH-capable trains. Perhaps Metro could guarantee train slots by fronting 2 billion or so for the tunnel in a 2024 Measure M2 ballot measure or else build the 150 MPH HSR line from LAUS to Burbank Airport. Regardless, the question isn't if it's possible, it's just about making the investment and distributing extremely valuable tunnel slots.

[jmecklenborg]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there is no such thing as 20 trains per hour in each direction on any high speed line, anywhere. The typical hourly train capacity is 12.


The full system California HSR timetables that have been created over the past 10 years envisioned 256 daily trains, so 128 in each direction. During the morning and afternoon rush hours there were no slots for Las Vegas trains, let alone commuter rail to Palmdale.

[Car(e)-Free LA]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there is no such thing as 20 trains per hour in each direction on any high speed line, anywhere. The typical hourly train capacity is 12.


The full system California HSR timetables that have been created over the past 10 years envisioned 256 daily trains, so 128 in each direction. During the morning and afternoon rush hours there were no slots for Las Vegas trains, let alone commuter rail to Palmdale.

The Tokaido Shinkasen tops out at trains every 3 minutes on two tracks at 175 MPH. That allows for the full 128 TPD each way+Vegas and Palmdale Metrolink service. The key is really good signalling, impeccable OTP, and 4 tracking in the miles leading up to every single station to allow overtakes. It's a high bar, but 4 tracks through the San Gabriel Mountains is harder.

[Busy Bee]

§§


Well we know large diameter tunnels capable of carrying 4 tracks under the San Gabriels to Palmdale is possible, the question is at how much additional cost. For the example of the SR-14 preferred route the question would be not just how much extra material cost for the actual tunnel due to increased diameter but also the reality that every short segment of at-grade or aerial portions would by definition also be double stacked. I have no clue how much this would add to the cost, but another 25%-35% would not be surprising.

[Busy Bee]

§§


Well we know large diameter tunnels capable of carrying 4 tracks under the San Gabriels to Palmdale is possible, the question is at how much additional cost. For the example of the SR-14 preferred route the question would be not just how much extra material cost for the actual tunnel due to increased diameter but also the reality that every short segment of at-grade or aerial portions would by definition also be double stacked. I have no clue how much this would add to the cost, but another 25%-35% would not be surprising. An alternate tunnel concept would be 4 independent tunnels instead of two but that requires wider ROW and accompanying aerial structures but would likely be cheaper than double stack.

[Car(e)-Free LA]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

§§


Well we know large diameter tunnels capable of carrying 4 tracks under the San Gabriels to Palmdale is possible, the question is at how much additional cost. For the example of the SR-14 preferred route the question would be not just how much extra material cost for the actual tunnel due to increased diameter but also the reality that every short segment of at-grade or aerial portions would by definition also be double stacked. I have no clue how much this would add to the cost, but another 25%-35% would not be surprising. An alternate tunnel concept would be 4 independent tunnels instead of two but that requires wider ROW and accompanying aerial structures but would likely be cheaper than double stack.

That's true, but I don't think Palmdale is worth the extra couple billion dollars. I'm fairly confident double tracking allows for 6TPH local service, but even if it doesn't and Palmdale can only get 1-2 TPH, it's better to spend the money on another subway through the Westside, upgrading the LOSSAN corridor through OC and SD to frequent 125 MPH regional rail, or getting HSR accross Cajon Pass.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Car(e)-Free LA

The Tokaido Shinkasen tops out at trains every 3 minutes on two tracks at 175 MPH. That allows for the full 128 TPD each way+Vegas and Palmdale Metrolink service. The key is really good signalling, impeccable OTP, and 4 tracking in the miles leading up to every single station to allow overtakes. It's a high bar, but 4 tracks through the San Gabriel Mountains is harder.

Can you provide a link to a Japan timetable?

As for 4-tracking the corridor - think instead about an eventual second mainline along I-5, which would bypass Bakersfield and Fresno and completely avoid Palmdale. The total mileage savings is about 50 miles. It would no doubt be a lot cheaper to build than what is currently being built in the Central Valley since it would have one or two stations at most.

That would free up the Palmdale section to commuter rail and Las Vegas.

However, I'd assume that the two lines would converge at Burbank Airport, and so the approach for the I-5 line would probably have to tunnel to LA Union, which wouldn't be cheap, plus connections to the Annaheim line and west to CAHSR Phase 2.

No telling what would be involved to connect to NoCal, but there is of course the possibility of building both the Peninsula approach AND Altamont.

[Busy Bee]

That brings us back to whether a Tejon Pass basin approach is wise, or even possible, due to seismic concerns. As for the claim it would require a tunnel to LAUS, I'm not sure why that would be true at all. The two routes could join just before Burbank and follow the same shared CHSR, LVHSR and Metrolink corridor, which would ideally be constructed correctly from the start, which would be a trench right-of-way with 4 tracks.

[jmecklenborg]

Also the planned tunnel(s) to Palmdale and also up north will be a pair of 29-foot diameter bores. They wouldn't do a single bore for two (or four stacked tracks) for a variety of reasons. One of them is safety - passengers and crews can escape to a parallel tunnel which is much safer than a hallway within a single tunnel.

[202_Cyclist]

It looks like construction has started for the Redlands - San Bernardino light-rail project.

Here’s what Redlands, San Bernardino lanes rail work will close the week of Jan. 20


Construction is well under way in downtown Redlands Wednesday Jan. 15, 2020, for a passenger rail line. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)


By Jennifer Iyer |
Redlands Daily Facts
January 18, 2020

"Work on the railroad tracks between Redlands and San Bernardino will close lanes, but not full streets the week of Monday, Jan. 20.

Intermittent weekday lane closures associated with the Redlands Passenger Rail project are scheduled between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. for University, Eureka and Orange streets in that city, and between 9 p.m. and 5 a.m. on Tippecanoe Avenue in San Bernardino..."

https://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/2...eek-of-jan-20/

[202_Cyclist]

It would be fantastic to provide a rail connection to Santa Ana/John Wayne.

Santa Ana Wants to Extend $408 Million Streetcar Project to John Wayne Airport and Anaheim’s Resort District

By BRANDON PHO AND HOSAM ELATTAR
January 23, 2020
Voice of OC

"The City of Santa Ana wants the Orange County Transportation Agency to expand a four-mile, $408 million streetcar project that’s currently under construction in the city’s downtown.

The project in its current form runs from Santa Ana’s train station to the city’s border with Garden Grove along Harbor Blvd. A resolution approved by the city council at their Tuesday meeting advocates expansions to the route north up Harbor Blvd to Anaheim’s tourist-heavy resort district, and down Bristol St. toward John Wayne Airport.

Santa Ana voted unanimously to adopt the resolution supporting extensions to the route, which is scheduled to open in early 2022..."

https://voiceofoc.org/2020/01/santa-...sort-district/

[plutonicpanda]

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist

It would be fantastic to provide a rail connection to Santa Ana/John Wayne.

Santa Ana Wants to Extend $408 Million Streetcar Project to John Wayne Airport and Anaheim’s Resort District

By BRANDON PHO AND HOSAM ELATTAR
January 23, 2020
Voice of OC

"The City of Santa Ana wants the Orange County Transportation Agency to expand a four-mile, $408 million streetcar project that’s currently under construction in the city’s downtown.

The project in its current form runs from Santa Ana’s train station to the city’s border with Garden Grove along Harbor Blvd. A resolution approved by the city council at their Tuesday meeting advocates expansions to the route north up Harbor Blvd to Anaheim’s tourist-heavy resort district, and down Bristol St. toward John Wayne Airport.

Santa Ana voted unanimously to adopt the resolution supporting extensions to the route, which is scheduled to open in early 2022..."

https://voiceofoc.org/2020/01/santa-...sort-district/

That seems like a logical expansion. I would only hope they build it elevated grade separated though that is unlikely. I am surprised funds were not found originally to extend it to Disney area. If the greenline can be extended to MetroLink and Santa Ana Branch line is eventually extended further into OC, OC will be reasonably connected to LA by rail.

In other OC news the 241 extension was killed. I am not happy about that and I wonder if that spells the final nail in the coffin for that route at all or if they will eventually study a new alignment.

[ReDSPork02]

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist

It looks like construction has started for the Redlands - San Bernardino light-rail project.

Here’s what Redlands, San Bernardino lanes rail work will close the week of Jan. 20


Construction is well under way in downtown Redlands Wednesday Jan. 15, 2020, for a passenger rail line. (Photo by Will Lester, Inland Valley Daily Bulletin/SCNG)


By Jennifer Iyer |
Redlands Daily Facts
January 18, 2020

"Work on the railroad tracks between Redlands and San Bernardino will close lanes, but not full streets the week of Monday, Jan. 20.

Intermittent weekday lane closures associated with the Redlands Passenger Rail project are scheduled between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. for University, Eureka and Orange streets in that city, and between 9 p.m. and 5 a.m. on Tippecanoe Avenue in San Bernardino..."

https://www.redlandsdailyfacts.com/2...eek-of-jan-20/

Measure G in the city of Redlands, failed to pass.

Measure G was to restructure current building regulations around the new train stations. To allow more than 2 story buildings and create TODs.
Anything taller than 2 stories is illegal in Redlands currently.

Measure G could change the city in many excellent ways

By Melinda Morang for the Redlands Community News

Jan 17, 2020

Redlands voters: On March 3, we will vote on City of Redlands Measure G, an important issue affecting our city’s future development.

In the 1970s and 1980s, Redlands voters adopted some ballot measures (R and N) that limit the number of new dwelling units that can be built within the city limits each year to 400. Measure G, if adopted, will remove these limitations within the area near the new commuter rail stations at New York Street, downtown, and the University of Redlands. The restriction will remain for the rest of the city. You can see the area affected in the maps at redlandstransitvillages.org/about. https://redlandstransitvillages.org/about/

https://www.redlandscommunitynews.co...5df6a522d.html

There were many false fear mongering facebook/statements/mailers going on. Specifically from the NO campaign supporters. "The Redlands Tea Party Patriots" a small local group that still believes in Birtherism and agenda21 conspiracies.

Sad state of affairs there. NIMBY-ism has won.

https://www.newsbreak.com/california...ded-for-defeat

Cant wait till the state comes in and imposes changes to these Nimbys.

The state already informed Redlands is needs about 4000 new units. So good luck!

[202_Cyclist]

Here is some good news for a change.

Metro Signs $1.3 Billion Full Funding Grant Agreement For Westside Subway Phase 3


By Joe Linton
Mar 24, 2020
Streets Blog

"Last week, Metro quietly signed a federal Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) for $1.3 billion to construct the Westside Purple Line Extension Section 3. Though this comes after a delay of more than two years in the federal government disbursing congressionally-approved transit monies, it is nonetheless great news for Southern California mobility.

Overall the extensions will add nine miles of Westside Purple Line (now renamed the “D Line”) subway, extending from Koreatown to Beverly Hills to West Los Angeles. Subway extension sections one and two are already under construction and are slated to open in 2023 and 2025, respectively. Phase three will extend the subway 2.6 miles from Century City to Westwood and the V.A. Hospital..."

https://la.streetsblog.org/2020/03/2...ubway-phase-3/

[Quixote]

^ Great news indeed, and it looks like phase 3 is still on track to open in 2027. But $3.6 billion for 2.6 miles of subway comes out to a little less than $1.4 billion per mile, which is absurd. There's just no way we'll ever be able to build the type of rail system we need (basically another 150-200 miles of reliable, grade-separated heavy rail beyond what's currently planned) to make car-free living possible for 2-3 million LA County residents. And the fact that Metro inexplicably refuses to explore elevated HRT alignments isn't doing any favors.