LAUS Tracks 13,14, & 15 Almost Done

[leemell]

On the TO forum there are pictures of the almost completed reinstalling of tracks 13, 14, & 15 and platform 7. The discussion there also indicated that nobody was sure why this was done. SCRRA has said that when this is complete they will begin rehab of the older platforms. Also the Legislature authorized the funds for run-through of tracks 3,4,5,&6. Engineering work was begun immediately, the EIR and FRA submissions were made in 2004 and may be updated.Completion was estimated for the end of 2013.

 

[Trogdor]

End of 2013 for run-through, or end of 2013 for platform rehab?

The latter, I'll believe. If the former, then I can only assume that was based on a submission in 2004 that assumed construction would start shortly thereafter.

 

[leemell]

End of 2013 for run-through, or end of 2013 for platform rehab?

The latter, I'll believe. If the former, then I can only assume that was based on a submission in 2004 that assumed construction would start shortly thereafter.

I think for both. The run-through requires that the tracks be raised and it makes a lot of sense (not usually used in public construction) to do it at the same time. It also requires the same tracks and platforms be taken out of service, that was the justification for putting the new tracks and platform in. The actual construction of the almost finished new platform and three tracks required about seven months.

 

[afigg]

End of 2013 for run-through, or end of 2013 for platform rehab?

The latter, I'll believe. If the former, then I can only assume that was based on a submission in 2004 that assumed construction would start shortly thereafter.

I did a Google search and came across a July 2012 $4 million funding allocation by Los Angeles County MTA for completing the environmental clearance and PE preparation for the LA Union Station run-through tracks. That may be the end of 2013 date.

The signing of the bill In July for the CA HSR project is stated in news reports as providing $350 million for the run-through tracks, so there is funding. There are other documents that list the run-through tracks as a $640 million project. So Metrolink or LA governmental authorities will be putting up the rest, I guess. Unlikely that a circa $640 million project would get completed in a year.

What has gotten overlooked in the news and controversy about the passage of the bill authorizing funding for the first stage of the CA HSR system is that the bill authorized the state to sell $4.7 billion in bonds which will be matched by a total of $7.9 billion in federal and local funds. $12.6 billion is a lot of money for passenger rail projects, some of which will be going to fund passenger rail and transit improvements in the SF and LA regions. Which will fund improvements and expansions for the current Amtrak corridor services.

 

[johnny.menhennet]

I was In LAUS on both Monday and Tuesday, and will see them again on Sunday. The platforms are really looking great, and IMO, they were necessary even without the run-throughs. Metrolink has done a great job of adding services recently, Witt the expresses last year and much better weekend services as well. Rush hour is hectic there, starting as early as 3:00 now with full trains.

 

[printman2000]

Can someone explain where the through tracks will go? I read somewhere online that they would go over the freeway that is right next to them. But after that, I see no place for them to go when looking at a google map image of the area.

 

[johnny.menhennet]

1345742352[/url]' post='389063']Can someone explain where the through tracks will go? I read somewhere online that they would go over the freeway that is right next to them. But after that, I see no place for them to go when looking at a google map image of the area.

Going south out of the station, the viaduct would likely go down to two tracks, make a hard 90 degree left turn, head over to the LA River, and then another hard 90 degree right turn to set it down before the maintenance area. All of this is me, not any facts in this post.

 

[leemell]

Can someone explain where the through tracks will go? I read somewhere online that they would go over the freeway that is right next to them. But after that, I see no place for them to go when looking at a google map image of the area.

Going south out of the station, the viaduct would likely go down to two tracks, make a hard 90 degree left turn, head over to the LA River, and then another hard 90 degree right turn to set it down before the maintenance area. All of this is me, not any facts in this post.

That is esstenially what the plan shows as alternative 1A and the most likely. The plan includes one emminent domain condemnation for the property and the second major property already is owned by the LAC Metro and is where the Metro Rail cars enter the underground rail system. The second turn by the LA River is not quite a "hard" 90 degrees.

 

[Nathanael]

On the TO forum there are pictures of the almost completed reinstalling of tracks 13, 14, & 15 and platform 7. The discussion there also indicated that nobody was sure why this was done. SCRRA has said that when this is complete they will begin rehab of the older platforms. Also the Legislature authorized the funds for run-through of tracks 3,4,5,&6. Engineering work was begun immediately, the EIR and FRA submissions were made in 2004 and may be updated.Completion was estimated for the end of 2013.

The run-through tracks are going to be at a raised track level (relative to the existing tracks) with raised platforms, so the tracks will have to be closed while they're built. The reinstallation of tracks 13/14/15 and platform 7 is to allow some "breathing room" for Amtrak and Metrolink. Now that there's an extra platform, one pair of tracks at a time can be closed to raise its height, while maintaining the same capacity.

 

[sportbiker]

This image is from a presentation to the Metro board. North is to the left. The existing throat is on the north side; the run-throughs will be on the south side.

The presentation is here.

 

[rrdude]

Sooooooooo COOL to see LAPUT being the center of attention. I was there shortly after the creation of Amtrak, and it was a friggin' GHOST TOWN. The development around the station since the, with Metro, Metrolink, Coaster, all of them, FANTASTIC. This addition of run-thrus will be even better.

Now, if they would just re-open to the public the original ticket booths........

 

[Anderson]

How long are the platforms at LAUS in terms of car lengths? i.e. How many cars can each platform accommodate?

 

[printman2000]

This image is from a presentation to the Metro board. North is to the left. The existing throat is on the north side; the run-throughs will be on the south side.

Thanks for that image. Helps a lot.

Course the tracks go right through what appears to be a pretty significant building.

 

[user 1215]

I have a lot of questions for someone who is familiar with the area. How are they going to build the through tracks? Going over the Santa Ana will result in a large grade climb doable for light rail but not heavy rail. Going underground is a possibility but still deals with gradients and building foundations. I thought the original plan was for two through tracks - this proposal looks like it is 7 tracks (merged into 4). I am also curious where the two tracks that already go underground coming up from the SE go (Near Ducommum and Center St). This isn't overlayed in the proposal as a part of the extension, so either a poor overlay or a potential conflict with an underground routing...

OK - Just figured out that the underground is the access rail to the metro yard. Means, I guess, they have to go over. Hmmm...

I continue to edit this as I study the proposal. Looks like the tracks at LAUS are already elevated over the 101. With the turning radus required, they get to miss all the vacant land between the 101 and E Commercial St. Instead, it's looking like they're going to "El" it over Commercial, over the DejaVu's Showgirls parking lot, until it simultaneously wyes and drops to grade closing Central St., into Viertel's Towing lot to go over the metro and under the high transmission power lines.

 

[leemell]

This new plan is significantly different than the 2004 effort. Four instead of two tracks over the freeway, seven instead of 4 run-through tracks and a station loop allowing arrivals and departures both ways from both ends of the station. Wow. Much better.

 

[Shawn Ryu]

Does LA Union Station really need more tracks? How busy is it during rush hour? Metrolink service is no where close to commuter service in Chicago and East Coast.

 

[sportbiker]

•  
  
• The track grade is already elevated and the 101 (not the 5) is already in a trench, so the rails have to be raised only 5-7 feet or so to clear the freeway.
  
• The plan is to build run-throughs (or at least plan and engineer run-throughs) for HSR at the same time as for Amtrak/Metrolink, which explains why the number of tracks involved has grown so much. The current "blended" HSR plan means high-speed trains and Amtrak/Metrolink will, for the most part, share tracks from Burbank-ish south through LAUS to Mouseland. (Bay to Basin configuration, not the initial operating segment configuration. It's complicated.)
  
• The building in the way (south of the freeway) is significant only in the sense that a few bucks will have to be spent tearing it down. It is otherwise a very insignificant building.
  
• Platforms at LAUS are of different lengths. AFAIK, there's nothing keeping shorter platforms growing northward except a need. Because of the different lengths, it's impossible to say how many coaches a platform can accommodate— you'd have to specify which platform. For myself, I've never measured, so it's a moot point unless someone else knows.
  

 

[sportbiker]

Does LA Union Station really need more tracks? How busy is it during rush hour? Metrolink service is no where close to commuter service in Chicago and East Coast.

For embarking and disembarking needs, there are tracks apenty as is. The issue is that both operators like to store trains on platform tracks between runs and LAUS doesn't have tail tracks. The Metrolink yard is a mile or two north of the station and the Amtrak yard is a couple of miles south— I'm confident some train ballet could keep the platforms clear and keep construction needs down, but The Powers That Be decided it's easier to add capacity.

 

[Shawn Ryu]

Ah I see, I knew there couldnt be enough demand to overcrowd LA Union station.

 

[rusty spike]

, B

Platforms at LAUS are of different lengths. AFAIK, there's nothing keeping shorter platforms growing northward except a need. Because of the different lengths, it's impossible to say how many coaches a platform can accommodate— you'd have to specify which platform. For myself, I've never measured, so it's a moot point unless someone else knows.

This may be completely irrelavant in 2012, but here is the original station track plan for LAUPT as drawn up in 1937. IMHO, I don't thnk much has changed regarding the platform lengths. So, for what it's worth, here it is.

Track #11 was the longest with a capicity of 20 cars headed out, and 17 cars in (locomotive--probably steam) up against the bumping post).

LAUPT_TrackPlan_1937

Source: The Last of the Great Stations, Bill Bradley, Inaterurban Publications 1979.

 

[sportbiker]

Amazing to see that diagram. Thanks for posting it. Some questions arise:

•  
  
• What's the purpose of tracks C and D? They look lonely out there. Track 17 is called out as storage but not C and D, so C and D might have been used for something else… but what?
  
• It looks like the throat has seven tracks. Today it has five. Which two were removed? When? Why?
  
• Six platform tracks share three engine tracks. What of the other platform tracks? How did their planned use differ, not requiring an engine track?
  
• Non-passenger tracks are lettered (A1-E, engine tracks F-H) and passenger tracks are numbered 1-16. Why is the storage track identified as 17 and not I or J (to avoid confusing I with 1)?
   
  

Does the book offer any clues?

 

[Anderson]

, B

Platforms at LAUS are of different lengths. AFAIK, there's nothing keeping shorter platforms growing northward except a need. Because of the different lengths, it's impossible to say how many coaches a platform can accommodate— you'd have to specify which platform. For myself, I've never measured, so it's a moot point unless someone else knows.

This may be completely irrelavant in 2012, but here is the original station track plan for LAUPT as drawn up in 1937. IMHO, I don't thnk much has changed regarding the platform lengths. So, for what it's worth, here it is.

Track #11 was the longest with a capicity of 20 cars headed out, and 17 cars in (locomotive--probably steam) up against the bumping post).

LAUPT_TrackPlan_1937

Source: The Last of the Great Stations, Bill Bradley, Inaterurban Publications 1979.

That's good to hear; I'll note that making the station a run-through raises the possibility of doubling up trains on tracks NYP-style (i.e. trains going north on one side and south on the other) if we should ever be so lucky to have that much need for trains. I can't see Surfliners or commuter trains getting deep in the double digits in terms of train numbers.

 

[zephyr17]

, B

Platforms at LAUS are of different lengths. AFAIK, there's nothing keeping shorter platforms growing northward except a need. Because of the different lengths, it's impossible to say how many coaches a platform can accommodate— you'd have to specify which platform. For myself, I've never measured, so it's a moot point unless someone else knows.

This may be completely irrelavant in 2012, but here is the original station track plan for LAUPT as drawn up in 1937. IMHO, I don't thnk much has changed regarding the platform lengths. So, for what it's worth, here it is.

Track #11 was the longest with a capicity of 20 cars headed out, and 17 cars in (locomotive--probably steam) up against the bumping post).

LAUPT_TrackPlan_1937

Source: The Last of the Great Stations, Bill Bradley, Inaterurban Publications 1979.

Platforms today are about 1 car length shorter or so. They shortened them all up on the south end when the put the El Monte busway through to Alameda in the 1980s, and didn't compensate on the other, throat end.

 

[leemell]

Ah I see, I knew there couldnt be enough demand to overcrowd LA Union station.

RailPAC claims that at rush hours, LAUS is heavily congested and the run-through could not be constructed without impacting Metrolink traffic capacity without the three new tracks.

And this from Amtrak California: Los Angeles Union Station remains a significant bottleneck, where all Amtrak and Metrolink trains (except the IEOC Line) operate in and out of the 10-track station through five approach tracks. Most conflicts were observed to be caused by deadhead movements to and from the Central Maintenance Facility. These deadhead movements often conflicted with inbound trains during the morning peak period and outbound trains during the afternoon peak period

 

[leemell]

I just found that if they want to, track 16 and platform 8 could be built. The MTA Patsauris (sp) building was built so that it can be done. Apparently it would go underneath the building. Just amazing that in a public works building they actually planned ahead for what must seem a small possibility.