Page 1 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 · Cut & Cover/TBM: Advantages and DisadvantagesPage 30 30...

Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Community Meeting, June 22, 2016

Purpose of Tonight’s Meeting

2

• Update on Metro Board directed Technical Study (Nov. 2014)

– SR-60 Alternative

– Washington Blvd Alternative

• Recap of Routing Concepts

• Construction Methods

• Break out Groups

Phases of Project Development

3

Initiate Public Meetings Define Alternatives,

Alternative Analysis (2009) Public Scoping Draft EIS/EIR (Aug. 2014) Public Comment Period

Locally Preferred Alternative

We Are

Here

Metro Board Directive (Nov. 2014)

Ongoing Public Participation

Metro Board Action (Nov 2014)

4

Continue Studying SR 60 North Side Design Variation (NSDV) option

Address Comments from Cooperating Agencies

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)

Southern California Edison (SCE)

US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE)

Explore feasibility of operating both alternatives

Eliminate aerial on Garfield Avenue between Via Campo and Whittier Blvd, and identify a new north-south connection to Washington Blvd

Eastside Phase 2 Study Area in Los Angeles County

5

6

Expo Line Extension (Phase 2) to

Santa Monica

• 6.6 mile corridor

• 7 Stations (4 at-grade and 3

aerial)

• 3 Park-and-ride lots

• Frequency - every 12

minutes

• 46 min trip from Downtown

LA to Santa Monica)

• Estimated 64,000 boardings

by 2030

• Cost of $1.5 billion

7

Expo Phase 2 Opening Weekend (May 20-21, 2016)

• Opening Ceremony 5/20

• Free rides 5/20 & 5/21

• Events held at all stations free to

the public

• Thousands attended opening

weekend events

• 1.9 mile underground line in

Downtown LA

• Extend Gold Line from Little

Tokyo Station to 7th/Metro

Station with 3 new stations

• 1 trip ride (no transfer): – Eastside Gold Line Extension

to Santa Monica

– Azusa to Long Beach

• Opening year in 2020

• $1.4 Billion

8

Regional Connector Transit Project

Currently Proposed Operating Plan

Eastside Phase 2 Study Area

9

Alternatives Studied in 2014 Draft EIS/EIR

10

Draft EIS/EIR Alternatives:

SR-60

6.9 Miles, 4 Stations (all aerial)

16,700 Average Daily Boardings (2035)

Washington Blvd (Garfield)

9.3 Miles, 6 Stations (3 aerial, 3 at-grade)

19,900 Average Daily Boardings (2035)

Eastside Phase 2 Funding

LRTP: $2.4 Billion, 2035 Delivery Date

Measure R: $1.27 Billion (2008$)

Alternatives Studied in 2014 Draft EIS/EIR

11

Aerial configuration no longer

under consideration

SR-60 North Side Design Variation (NSDV) Alternative

12

13

SR-60 North Side Design Variation Segment

OII Landfill Superfund Site

Greenwood Av LRT crossover affects the ability to widen SR 60 to full standard +

HOV lanes

Market Place Drive Need to move the

crossover further east to avoid visual impact to

Market Place Development

Paramount Blvd • Need to modify

LRT column location to avoid conflict with Caltrans’ ramp improvements

• Need to raise SCE wires to provide clearances

SR 60 NSDV LRT Alternative

Monterey Park Market Place

OII Landfill Superfund Site

New N/S Connection to Washington Blvd

14

Potential Washington Blvd Routing Concepts

15

Evaluated/Screened Concepts

Initial Washington Blvd Routing Concepts

Feedback From Stakeholders

16

Corridor Opportunities Key Challenges

Arizona/ Telegraph

Economic revitalization on Whittier Corridor

Preserving on-street parking (between 3rd and Whittier)

Atlantic

Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) in Atlantic and Whittier Corridors

Traffic/circulation impacts with at-grade LRT

Garfield (Underground)

Helps revitalize south Montebello along Washington Blvd

Property impact during and after construction of subway portals;

Sewer line and storm drain issues

17

• Collected new traffic data for 33

Intersections

• Conducted field observations for:

– Driveways and access conditions

– School crossings (6)

– Potential visibility issues (if any)

– Queuing Issues (if any)

• Developed future traffic data (2040)

• Initial Findings:

– Traffic heavier on Atlantic (peak and

midday)

– Additional safety and operations

analysis are recommended for 8

locations (25%)

Initial Grade Crossing Analysis

Map of Study Locations

3rd St

Washington Blvd Alternative – What’s Next?

18

• Grade Crossing Analysis

• Siting and Design of Tunnel Portals (if applicable)

• Station Planning

• Right-of-Way Impacts

• Utility investigations

• Engineering studies in support of new cost estimates

Two Primary Methods of Underground Construction

19

Cut & Cover

Cut & cover construction (Mariachi Plaza) Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM)

(Typically used for a 1-mile or longer segment)

Bored Tunnel definition: shallow tunnel dug from the surface, then covered

definition: deep tunnel burrowed via a boring machine

Stage 1 – Install Soldier Piles

20

Cut and Cover

Phasing

• Implement Traffic Control

• Drilling of Soldier Piles

Surface

Disruptions

Potential partial & complete

street closures

Duration

(Months)

3-4 months for a station

Stage 2 – Install Decks

21

Cut and Cover

Phasing

• Close Street

• Excavate 12’ below Surface

• Install Deck Beams

• Support Utilities

• Install Decking

Surface

Disruptions

Potential complete street

closures

Duration

(Months)


Stage 3 – Excavate Station from Surface

22

Cut and Cover

Phasing

• Detour Traffic

• Excavate Trench

• Install Struts

Surface

Disruptions

Potential partial & complete

street closures

Duration

(Months)


Stage 4 – Excavate Station from Below Surface

23

Cut and Cover

Phasing

• Excavate Below upper

strut

• Install Lagging

Surface

Disruptions

Occasional partial street

closures

Duration

(Months)

6 months for a station

Stage 5 – Excavate Lower Levels of Station

24

Cut and Cover

Phasing

• Install Struts

• Excavate Middle strut

• Install Lagging

Surface

Disruptions

Occasional partial street

closures

Duration

(Months)

6 months for a station

Cut & Cover Construction (Mariachi Plaza)

25

Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM)

Launch Pit at Metro Gold Line Little Tokyo

26

Tunnel Boring Launch site at 1st St. & Alameda St.

Steps to launch TBM:

1.Space Need (4-6 acres)

2.Demolition and utility relocation

3.Dig Launch Pit

4.Install piles, struts and decking

5.Lower TBM into position

Tunnel Boring Machine for Metro Crenshaw/LAX

Tunnel boring machine (TBM) Launch Site Cross Section •Cut & Cover Construction at Launch site

Deck Beam

Struts

Deck Panels

Construction Fence

Piles

Off-Street- TBM Launch Site /

Construction staging

Tunnel Boring Machines

Regional Connector Project Tunneling Duration

28

Activity Duration (Months)

Pre-construction 4-6 months

Site preparation 12-18 months

Cut & cover at Portal & station 24-48 months

2nd St TBM Tunnel 24-48 months

Dodger Stadium ~12 acres Evergreen Cemetery ~ 6 acres

4-6 Football Fields

About 6 acres

1 acre = 1 football field

Space Needed to Launch TBM: 4 to 6 Acres

Staples Center ~ 5.5 acres

Dodger Stadium ~12 acres

About 5 acres

Cut & Cover/TBM: Advantages and Disadvantages

30

Tunneling Method Advantages Disadvantages

Cut &

Cover

• Potentially less

noise/vibration and visual

impacts after temporary

decking is installed

(compared to at-grade

construction)

• ROW acquisition

• Major traffic disruptions along

alignment for extended durations

• Traffic diversion to parallel streets

• Major disruption to access to

residences and businesses along

entire alignment for extended

durations

• Noise and visual impacts until

temporary decking is installed

TBM

• Less construction activity on

surface

• Avoids most typical utilities

• Can improve schedule

• Major ROW acquisition for large

staging area needed for

launching/extracting TBM

• Similar disruptions to Cut and Cover

but only at station and

launching/extracting TBM and for

shorter period of time

Typically used for a 1-mile or

longer segment

Interactive Discussion

• Join a discussion group

• Nominate a group spokesperson

• Share what you discussed

• Comments and Questions

31

Topics to Discuss

• Based on what you’ve heard, which corridors are most promising? Why?

• Where should stations be located? Why?

• What do we need to know?

32

33

Next Steps for Technical Study

Continue stakeholder/community outreach meetings

Incorporate feedback in project planning

Continue technical analysis

Present findings of Technical Study to Metro Board (early 2017)

33

[email protected]

Q&A

Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2

34

Page 1 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 · Cut & Cover/TBM: Advantages and DisadvantagesPage 30 30...

Documents

Transcript of Page 1 Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 · Cut & Cover/TBM: Advantages and DisadvantagesPage 30 30...