SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   LOS ANGELES | Transportation News & Discussion (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=171029)

LosAngelesSportsFan Oct 18, 2010 9:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pesto (Post 5021021)
Just to get off my Crenshaw negativity, the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena problem is interesting. Trolley from DT LA to Glendale makes some sense since it is short (4-5 miles), connects dense areas and Glendale has shown a willingness to allow development along Brand, Colorado and south of 134 generally.

I'm not sure about the extent of demand for Glendale to Burbank and Pasadena. Being part of a metro area heavy rail might make more sense (Ventura to San Bernardino) but I don't know that trains every 20 minutes are needed. Could be wrong.

A cross SFV line into the SGV is too far away to imagine right now.

Definitely wrong about the need for a Pasadena Glendale Burbank Line. the Tri-Cities as they are called, are very much linked together and almost function as one. I think Glendale needs rail on Brand/Central until Glenoaks, to a lesser degree on Broadway and Glendale ave, Burbank needs rail at the media center and Downtown and Pasadena needs a local Streetcar. Once that happens, there would be heavy usage in those cities.

Dont forget that the Tri-Cities together are a major office center and are home to many jobs and about 500,000 people.

Wright Concept Oct 18, 2010 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Westsidelife (Post 5017966)
Does this mean there's now enough funds to build the optional Crenshaw/Vernon station? That's the heart of the Crenshaw community.

No, this is a loan based upon Measure R revenues this is not new money per se, but an advancement on the projected budget. So they will still need to bridge the funding gap for the extra components which right now is nearing $600Million dollars for all the extra stations, grade separations, etc.

Wright Concept Oct 18, 2010 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LosAngelesBeauty (Post 5018244)
I think that a subway line down Beverly Blvd is imperative in the future to really allow people to live car free in "the city."

If you think about it, Beverly Blvd has tons of potential and is already a major thoroughfare.

It also slices Central LA right in half down the middle (where Wilshire Blvd. is the southern boundary and Sunset and Hollywood Blvds form the northern boundary).

If you think about it, you definitely need another east/west line down Beverly Blvd. from the Beverly Center all the way to the Vermont/Beverly Red Line station.


http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/6454/30648999.jpg

If you look at the map of the central city core, Beverly Blvd. really slices LA in half.

The line I drew is about 5 miles, which would make a subway down Beverly Blvd. about $1.8 billion (the price of LA Live!) :)


My answer is going to be a NO! Beverly Blvd has a sore spot right in the Middle that will be a deteriment for ridership and its success and it's called Hancock Park. Better a streetcar on 3rd Street or another rail corridor down Santa Monica Blvd/Sunset Blvd to hit up Silver Lake, Echo Park and Dodger Stadium would be a stronger boon for the city than a line down Beverly.

Wright Concept Oct 18, 2010 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Westsidelife (Post 5009236)
^ I'm assuming it'll have signal priority. But if not, it shouldn't matter too much since the street-running Colorado portion consitutes only a small portion of the route (0.8 miles).

Santa Monica portion of Expo Line will operate under signal priority at all lights except Lincoln Blvd which is a minor delay at most.

Wright Concept Oct 18, 2010 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sodha (Post 5020893)
Crenshaw was picked first due to the following

1 - it's in the FEIR process and expected to be released early 2011. Thus, once approved after 45 days of issuance it can go out to bid. So, construction can start next year after certification. The Expo Line Phase II is already certified and the money is already granted from the state funding sources (Prop 1B) and Measure R ($1.5 billion). Measure R wouldn't have provided funds for Crenshaw until 2013. So instead of waiting 2 years for construction on Crenshaw, it can start next year.

This is more the answer than the #2 point becuase Foothill has its funding together, Expo Phase 2, then Crenshaw was up to bat next. The Wilshire Subway and Regional Connector are expected to get New Starts funding once they complete their FEIR in 2011-12.

LosAngelesBeauty Oct 19, 2010 9:45 PM

Thanks for all the clarifications WC!

I think the future Crenshaw Line should go up San Vicente like the originally proposed Pink Line.


Something like this (follow the Orange Line/Crenshaw Line):

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/210...italsubway.jpg

OhioGuy Oct 19, 2010 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LosAngelesBeauty (Post 5022919)
Thanks for all the clarifications WC!

I think the future Crenshaw Line should go up San Vicente like the originally proposed Pink Line.

I agree. To send the line up Fairfax, or even worse send it up La Brea, would be rather unfortunate as it would result in the western half of West Hollywood completing missing out on rail transit. The retail, bars, & restaurants along Santa Monica Blvd to the west of Fairfax would be at a disadvantage to areas further east. Plus, serving Cedars-Sinai would be beneficial to patients & employees.

Personally, I'd send it from San Vicente briefly up Fairfax to 3rd St (The Grove), then west to La Cienega where it would turn north to Santa Monica Blvd. But the cost of subway light rail construction beginning at San Vicente & Fairfax might be too much. So sending the line further along San Vicente and then descending underground somewhere in the vicinity of Cedars-Sinai might prove a better option.

JDRCRASH Oct 19, 2010 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan (Post 5021030)
I think Glendale needs rail on Brand/Central until Glenoaks

You mean the Yellow Line, right?

This is how I think it should go:

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...45276&t=h&z=15

LosAngelesSportsFan Oct 20, 2010 6:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH (Post 5023029)
You mean the Yellow Line, right?

This is how I think it should go:

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...45276&t=h&z=15


Not bad, it hits good locations and would have decent ridership. im not sure on the stretch on the 134 all the way to lankershim, but i cant think of a better way right now lol.

pesto Oct 21, 2010 1:10 AM

LASF: I'm not sure I see that much motivation to go from, say, Brand to DT Burbank. Is there some natural commute or work connection or shopping connection? I've lived and had family in Glendale for many years and they basically never go to Burbank, and to Pasadena only for occasional walking around Old Town. And this is a very easy drive or good bus service along Colorado.

Connecting them without extending the connection futher seems to be inefficient. Connecting all of them into the "LA grid" via DT or Hollywood makes a lot more sense (especially if the Pink Line is there to connect them to mid-city). This could be a major feeder to the grid.

pesto Oct 21, 2010 1:17 AM

Formal legal explanations are excuses not reasons. We should recall that rules can be modified or suspended (and quite regularly are) when political, social or economic conditions require it.

I also hope that your analysis is not right, because if it is you are basically saying that the system motivates every lousy project to get an EIR as quickly as possible so it can jump ahead of needed projects. A truly terrible way to a run an economy.

JDRCRASH Oct 21, 2010 3:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan (Post 5023582)
Not bad, it hits good locations and would have decent ridership. im not sure on the stretch on the 134 all the way to lankershim, but i cant think of a better way right now lol.


Connecting to the Orange Line via the Chandler ROW might mean less stations between Lankershim-Burbank Metrolink and Burbank Metrolink-DT Burbank, but it promotes higher speed and efficiency on the Yellow Line.

Plus, large gaps like those mentioned above will, IMO, encourage a Gold/Orange link, mainly because they could be very useful for a commute of such massive distance like Chatsworth-Pasadena (or beyond).

Wright Concept Oct 21, 2010 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pesto (Post 5024654)
Formal legal explanations are excuses not reasons. We should recall that rules can be modified or suspended (and quite regularly are) when political, social or economic conditions require it.

Then with that you jeopardize all the good projects that come along because its based on those same conditions.

Quote:

I also hope that your analysis is not right, because if it is you are basically saying that the system motivates every lousy project to get an EIR as quickly as possible so it can jump ahead of needed projects. A truly terrible way to a run an economy.
Because politically and even regionally with a County as large as ours and with a political motivation factor (i.e. Countywide Sales Tax funding the building of the system) then these are going to be factors into it. If there was no EIR process I think a lot of this would be a moot point or be so contentious to point of a flare-up argument everytime and nothing gets built.

Quixote Oct 22, 2010 8:19 PM

OCTOBER 15, 2010 | Expo Line
 
The Expo Line is coming along beautifully. It's just too bad that it's faced delay after delay after delay. The line should be up and running by August 2011.

A tour of Expo's progress from USC/Expo Park to Culver City...

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1405/...65d7463a_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1332/...b8638f69_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1084/...fd0a15bb_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1090/...b22d851f_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/...a14d712d_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1327/...53eba435_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4144/...174ae93c_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1063/...bdbb7372_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1059/...a586a7ac_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4085/...e8988a08_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1438/...43719d1e_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1089/...eb07fbce_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1404/...a579eb64_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1055/...5e7422c7_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1358/...dba43b8d_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1085/...8f773457_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1235/...b12a8e31_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4148/...d30b4d6e_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1400/...a688562a_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1202/...e10e2abb_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1321/...cc8ce24b_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1142/...7d21181b_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1241/...de8baf40_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4126/...e6891a73_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1426/...a95c089c_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1342/...448b628a_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1192/...0e8063fd_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/...f6deae52_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1318/...f0edde21_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1091/...2182fe10_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1229/...52c8d82d_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1430/...725d8ee6_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1405/...9a54b0ea_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1142/...70453279_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4129/...5345d0a9_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4092/...f1034ba4_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1136/...4b65e115_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1106/...a8a57c5d_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1093/...1d9c195c_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1073/...2486d131_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1123/...0779ef2b_b.jpg
From Flickr, by ExpoLightRail

LosAngelesBeauty Oct 22, 2010 10:40 PM

Beautiful pics Westsidelife. Thank you for sharing them.

I love looking at construction photos of transit projects in LA. Each new line brings us closer to being a mature urban city.

I still am having some issues with the inconsistency of the naming of the lines.

With all the new rail lines coming in the future, I think we are seriously going to run out of colors (since we can't use brown or black or yellow for obviously dumb reasons).

I think even the Expo Line having a hard time getting a color designation means that as future lines get built (Crenshaw, etc.), what will they be called?

The system dare not have non-color names mixed in with color names! :koko:

Quixote Oct 23, 2010 2:16 AM

^ Agreed about the issue with using colors to name the rail lines. Even "Aqua" and "Rose" -- the colors likely to be assigned to Expo and Crenshaw, respectively -- sound a bit silly.

I much prefer naming our rail lines after local streets/corridors (i.e. Wilshire, Exposition, Crenshaw, Foothill, Sepulveda, etc.). That is much more interesting.

LosAngelesBeauty Oct 23, 2010 3:11 AM

I agree about naming the rail lines after the route. It reminds me of London's system.

Or we could go with Mexico City's which I believe has animals and other symbols I believe!

Either way, this will need to be addressed sooner rather than later.

DJM19 Oct 23, 2010 7:44 AM

I'm down for letters and numbers.

LAofAnaheim Oct 24, 2010 2:05 AM

Chicago has a great system of naming their trains................it's after colors. It works for the 3rd largest city in the United States...what's wrong with colors? Atlanta, San Diego and Dallas also do it!

Vangelist Oct 24, 2010 2:36 AM

Quote:

If you want a one-seat ride between LAX and Downtown, you will have to wait for the LAX Express. But even then, you would have to transfer at Union Station to get to the heart of Downtown. For now, the LAX Flyaway is your answer.
What is LAX Express? Or rather what will it be? Are certain routes getting express tracks now?

And WHY isnt the Crenshaw Line getting a DIRECT connection into the terminals at LAX? Why is Metro being so short-sighted again...can you say cutting corners?

West Hollywood REALLY wanted the subway - campaigned hard for it, hired a professional lobbyist for it...compare that to all the other f@cking pseudo- westside cities like Cheviot Hills that have been opposing transit. It's sad that their temporary answer is NO.

So: someone please tell me before I have to go wade threw 100 unread Curbed comments - has it been decided with finality that the Crenshaw Line north of Wilshire (likely up San Vicente as that was the original streetcar route from a century ago) will definitely be light rail, (as Metro is refusing to build a subway connector station at Robertson for the Purple Line) ?

OR is there a chance - however minute - that the "Pink Line" could still turn into heavy rail subway?

And how minute is that chance?

Not having the efficiency of heavy rail in such large, central, crowded areas of the city = imo, BIG big mistake


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:39 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.