Bumping this to the new page. Thanks to numble for getting these
You've done more on this topic than any local news outlets, which says a lot about the state of local news reporting.
The more I read the Bechtel report, the more I like it. They've hit it on the bullseye on a lot of things that have been discussed on here and other transit forums elsewhere. Single bore tunnel to save cost, open gangway (and shorter) trains to fit more people and reduce platform size, good station locations, pay attention to bus transfers etc.
They seem to prefer Sepulveda alignment south of Expo to LAX but I think that is based on ease of construction and path of least resistance. Overland and Centinela alignments both have 1 extra station compare to Sepulveda so that also drives up costs. It's something that Metro did to rig the analysis as we discussed before.
The Skyrail proposal is ok but the terrible placement of the stations is a huge problem. One glaring issue - no discussion on the cost of tunneling from Getty center to UCLA and the underground station. And because the tunneling is an option, not their base case proposal, they did not address why once they detour off the 405, why do they want to return to the 405 when it is a straight shot down Westwood to Overland. Also, it is evident that they've already laid the political groundwork for their bid to go thru... I think the cake is already baked. At this point, it will take a major push from heavy rail advocates to try to overturn it. The fact that BYD had basically copted Move LA is a huge factor. We are here debating the merits, I don't think that's how the board will vote based on the merits. Especially if Move LA decides to stay on the sideline. Perhaps we should start thinking about how to salvage the Skyrail proposal and push them to do underground in West LA from Getty Center to LAX.
The Tutor proposal was lacking in detail compared to Bechtel and I can see why Metro decided to chose one and not the other to go forward.