Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Welcome! State Route 2 (SR-2) Terminus Project State Route 2 (SR 2) Terminus Project Community Open House, Mayberry Elementary August 29, 2012 6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Today’s Agenda 6:00 p.m. – Open House 6:30 p.m. – Project Presentation 7:30 p.m. – Open House
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
6:00 p.m. – Open House6:30 p.m. – Project Presentation7:30 p.m. – Open House
Participating Agencies
• MetroP j t St d L d– Project Study Lead
• Caltrans– SR-2 Mainline and Terminus
– Project LeadProject Lead
• City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation– Glendale Blvd
SR-2 Freeway Terminus Improvement Project
Purpose of Today’s Meeting
• Project updated– Agency coordination
– Hybrid alternative
– Upcoming activities
SR-2 Project History
• 1992 – 2002 - Three relevant studies on SR-2 Terminus
Glendale Free a /Bo le ard Corridor St d LACTC- Glendale Freeway /Boulevard Corridor Study - LACTC
- Glendale Boulevard Corridor Preliminary Planning Study -Metro/LADOT
- Project Study Report/Project Development Support -Metro/Caltrans/LADOT
2006 2007 I iti l St d /E i t l A t (IS/EA)• 2006 – 2007 - Initial Study/Environmental Assessment (IS/EA) process begins, including scoping, community design workshop, and focus group meetings and identification of project alternatives (Metro/Caltrans/DOT)(Metro/Caltrans/DOT)
• 2009 – Draft IS/EA and Project Report are completed; preparation of documentation for the Final IS/EA (Metro/Caltrans) / ( / )
SR-2 Project History
•2010 – Metro Board recommends and Caltrans adopts fi l i l d dfinal environmental documents and approves recommended project alternative
d lIssue Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)/Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
•2011 – 2014 - Develop Final Engineering/Construction Documents (Phased implementation)
SR-2 Project: Purpose and Need
SR-2 Purpose and Need Statement:
B tt t ffi fl t th t i• Better manage traffic flow at the terminus • Enhance accessibility and safety in the vicinity of the
SR-2 terminusSR 2 terminus• Minimizes cut-through traffic for neighborhoods in
the vicinity of the terminusy• Develop a freeway terminus design that is
compatible with existing residential and commercial i h i di i i iuses in the immediate vicinity
SR-2 Project Community Involvement
• Six alternatives (A-E)- Range from No Build, widening ramps, realigning ramps east,Range from No Build, widening ramps, realigning ramps east,
removing or retaining the flyover and overpass
• Community Involvement (2006 – 2010)y ( )- Three Scoping meetings- Six public meetings/workshops- Five focus groups meetingsFive focus groups meetings- One public hearing- Seven community group presentations
• Echo Park Citizens Action Committee and Echo Park ImprovementEcho Park Citizens Action Committee and Echo Park Improvement Association
• Silver Lake Neighborhood Council and Transportation Committee• Greater Echo Park Elysian Neighborhood Council
• Ramp Meter - Install a meter on the SR-2 southbound flyover rampSR 2 southbound flyover ramp
Median Improvements:E d d i b ifi i• Extend and incorporate beautification element to the existing median on Glendale Blvd towards the AllesandroGlendale Blvd towards the Allesandro St intersection
Phase 1B - SoundwallsPhase 1B (cont.) • Install new 12-16 ft soundwalls
• Westside of the freeway (Glendale Blvd to Lake View Ave)• Westside of the freeway (Glendale Blvd to Lake View Ave)• Eastside of the freeway (Oak Glen Place to north of El Moran Way)
• Eliminated soundwalls (Noise evaluation/study)hb d l d l l d d f l h l• Southbound Glendale Blvd adjacent to St. Teresa of Avila School
• Eastside of the freeway (Fargo St and Oak Glen Place)
Phase 1B - Soundwalls
Soundwalls• The IS/EA noise report identified the soundwall / p
locations for the SR-2 Terminus Project
Soundwall criteriaSoundwall criteria• Reading of at least 67 decibels (db) for an
extended period p• Walls must reduce the average noise by at least
5 db • Wall must be feasible and reasonable in cost