
Metro released the draft environmental
study today for a project that could potentially extend the Gold Line
from East Los Angeles to South El Monte or Whittier. In addition, the
study also looks at a Transportation Systems Management (TSM)
alternative which identifies potential bus upgrades and the legally
required no-build option.
Metro will conduct four public hearings
during the 60-day formal comment period, each of which will include a 30
minute open house where the public can view the Draft EIS/EIR, see
project displays, get more information on the project and talk to Metro
staff. Meeting date and times are:
Saturday, September 27, 2014
Pico Rivera Senior Center
9200 Mines Avenue
Pico Rivera, CA 90660
Open House: 9am
Public Hearing: 9:30am – 11:30am
Pico Rivera Senior Center
9200 Mines Avenue
Pico Rivera, CA 90660
Open House: 9am
Public Hearing: 9:30am – 11:30am
Monday, September 29, 2014
Quiet Cannon Banquet Center
901 Via San Clemente
Montebello, CA 90640
Open House: 5:30pm
Public Hearing: 6pm – 8pm
Quiet Cannon Banquet Center
901 Via San Clemente
Montebello, CA 90640
Open House: 5:30pm
Public Hearing: 6pm – 8pm
Tuesday, September 30, 2014
Uptown Whittier Senior Center
13225 Walnut Street
Whittier, CA 90602
Open House: 5:30pm
Public Hearing: 6pm – 8pm
Uptown Whittier Senior Center
13225 Walnut Street
Whittier, CA 90602
Open House: 5:30pm
Public Hearing: 6pm – 8pm
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
South El Monte Senior Center
1556 Central Avenue
South El Monte, CA 91733
Open House: 5:30pm
Public Hearing: 6pm – 8pm
South El Monte Senior Center
1556 Central Avenue
South El Monte, CA 91733
Open House: 5:30pm
Public Hearing: 6pm – 8pm
The study process has been closely
watched by communities along both potential light rail routes as an
extended Gold line would provide an alternative to driving on the
frequently congested 60 freeway or traffic in communities along the
Washington Boulevard alignment. The two light rail options, shown above,
would both begin at the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension’s current
terminus at Atlantic and Pomona boulevards in East Los Angeles.
•The “SR 60″ Alternative would extend the
Gold Line for 6.9 miles to South El Monte with four proposed new
stations. The train would run adjacent to the 60 freeway, mostly on
aerial structures, and include four new stations serving Monterey Park,
Montebello and South El Monte.
•The “Washington Boulevard” Alternative
would extend the Gold Line for 9.5 miles to Whittier with six proposed
new stations. The train would follow the 60 freeway and then turn south,
running on an aerial structure above Garfield Avenue until turning east
on Washington Boulevard and ending near the intersection of Washington
and Lambert Road. This alternative would serve Monterey Park,
Montebello, Pico Rivera and Whittier.
Estimated ridership for the SR 60
alternative is 16,700 boardings each weekday with a cost estimate of
$1.271 billion to $1.296 billion, according to the draft study.
Estimated ridership for the Washington Boulevard alternative is 19,900
daily boardings per weekday with an estimated cost of $1.425 billion to
$1.661 billion.
Metro staff plan to recommend a Locally
Preferred Alternative to the Metro Board in November. At that point, it
will be up to the Metro Board of Directors — who oversee the agency — to
decide how to proceed with the study.
Rail is seen as a viable alternative
because work trips in the study area are expected to increase by 32
percent by 2035 and peak-period travel times increase 25 percent in the
morning and 34 percent in the evening by 2035. Metro also says the area
has a “significant” level of transit dependent, with 38 percent of the
study area’s population under 18 or over 65 years of age and 16 percent
of the households categorized as “low income.” Twelve percent of the
households have no vehicles.
The study — formally called the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement/Report — is a legally-required document
needed before any project can be built. The study considers the need for
a project, a variety of project alternatives, potential impacts and
mitigations. The draft study is a prelude to a final study that weighs
public opinion and incorporates changes from the draft study.
The expense of both alternatives is due,
in part, to the long aerial sections required due to lack of space at
ground level and/or narrow streets. The SR 60 alternative would run
almost entirely on aerial structures. The Washington Boulevard
alternative would use aerial structures along the 60 freeway, Garfield
Avenue and parts of Washington.
Funding for a potential extension of the
Eastside Gold Line was included in the Measure R half-cent sales tax
increase that was approved by 68 percent of Los Angeles County voters in
2008. Measure R is scheduled to provide $1.27 billion for the project.
Metro often assembles funding from several local, state and federal
sources to fully fund large transit projects.
Under Metro’s long-range plan, the second
phase of the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension is not scheduled to be
in operation until 2035. But Metro decided to move ahead with the draft
study should funds be secured that would allow the agency to build it
sooner.
One potential source of funds would be an
expansion of federal funding for transit projects through Metro’s
America Fast Forward (AFF) initiative. Congress hasn’t made a decision
yet on whether to expand AFF. The Metro Board of Directors has also
discussed the possibility of a countywide ballot measure in 2016 that
could possibly supply money needed to accelerate this project and
others.
Another Measure R project, the Regional
Connector, is under construction in downtown Los Angeles and will be a
1.9-mile underground light rail line that connects the Gold Line to the
Blue and Expo Lines. That will be significant for riders along the
Eastside Gold Line — the Connector will allow for a one-seat ride into
the heart of downtown without first having to travel to Union Station
and transfer to the Metro Red/Purple Line subway.
The Eastside Gold Line project has thus
far proved to be an interesting reversal on the way transit projects are
done in L.A. County. In years past, rail projects have often been
heavily resisted by cities or particular neighborhoods — for example,
until this summer, there was a state law prohibiting rail from being
built along sections of the Orange Line in the San Fernando Valley.
However, cities along both potential
Eastside Gold Line alternatives have been actively championing the
respective alternatives since they were first identified in earlier
studies several years ago. The obvious upside is that community support
makes it a lot easier to build and fund transit.
The downside, in this case, is that there
is not enough Measure R funds to built both light rail alternatives,
and there would also be operational challenges involved in splitting
service between two Gold Line segments.
If the Metro Board of Directors decided
to consider building both alternatives they would have to find a way to
fund it. Even a potential new sales tax ballot measure in 2016 is
challenging because of the two-thirds threshold it would need to be
approved and an already long list of projects that are candidates for
funding.

The
project could potentially extend the Gold Line from its current
terminus at Atlantic and Pomona boulevards in East Los Angeles, above,
to South El Monte or Whittier. Photo by Steve Hymon/Metro.