LOS ANGELES | Transportation News & Discussion

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by TowerDude

Wonder if the Sepulveda Train could be extended to Burbank Airport to eventually directly connect it with LAX.

Probably not. But maybe if Crenshaw North is fast-tracked, perhaps it can be extended even further north from Hollywood into the Valley onto Hollywood Way (if not Olive Ave)?

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist

Image courtesy of the Whittier Daily News

So people are going to have to switch trains? This won't just be an extension of the Gold Line?

[JDRCRASH]

And apparently the “recommendation” is that it end at… Greenwood

https://twitter.com/numble/status/1590532120338124801

[Easy]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

So people are going to have to switch trains? This won't just be an extension of the Gold Line?

No they won't have to switch trains. Yes this will be an extension. They drew the map oddly because of the existing terminal station that will be relocated.

[Easy]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

And apparently the “recommendation” is that it end at… Greenwood

https://twitter.com/numble/status/1590532120338124801

Because of money. The full extension would be $10 billion and even this stubby 4.6 mile section is over $7 billion. Good lord!

[hughfb3]

Crenshaw line is the final straw for me. After riding it a few times and seeing what Metro is proposing for the east side Gold line, I have come to the conclusion...

Angelenos dont want Light Rail. What we want is a fast grade separated easily connected rail system. Metro; up until the the Sepulveda pass, has only given us the choice of "Light" & "Heavy" rail.

Here's hoping we finally get Skytrain technology which is designed to be grade separated at a cheaper cost that the heavy rail systems we've been building and faster than the light rail systems we've been pushing underground when we want a little more speed to make up for the stopping at traffic lights.

Make no mistake, I love Overhead catenary street rail, but let's not get it confused with a rapid transit system

[Busy Bee]

^ Just out of curiousity do you work for a LIM company of some sort?

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Easy

No they won't have to switch trains. Yes this will be an extension. They drew the map oddly because of the existing terminal station that will be relocated.

Thank heavens.

The cost of this extension is shocking.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

^ Just out of curiousity do you work for a LIM company of some sort?

I am a singer/performer and travel the world for events. I am in an airport and new city every weekend. Always at LAX which is why I am lately doing the most updates in that thread. I prefer Delta, but productions often book me on American or Jet Blue. United rarely comes up and most of my performances are too far for a Southwest flight. I love the Munich Metro and its open gangway trains, New York has an expansive system, and I love the streetcar systems of Melbourne and Toronto and the Straßenbahn of Augsburg... but, In all my travels, the skytrain system has been the best system I've ever ridden with regards to speed, quietness… and the views allow something the Subways and the tubes and the at-grade metros dont offer. I am obsessed with magnets and I am excited/passionate about the possibility of it here in LA with our biggest selling points accessible to all... views of the basin and Hills.

My dream would be for LA to build a proper at grade light rail that blankets the central city, westside, the valley; and a rapid transit that whisks people in from the suburbs on a truly grade separated system, where people can enjoy riding into the city as they sip their coffee while enjoying the view of a sunrise or sunset over mountains and/or beaches. I should work for a LIM company as much as Im obsessed... but that would mean that I might not be performing as much... and I love what I do. Maybe I could be a "LIMfluencer"



[/url]
Was at LAX on Monday and the people mover is getting closer to connecting with Metro K. #Views

[Illithid Dude]

Boosterism or not, LIM is better than light rail. I don't think anyone here would be opposed to a totally grade separated system. The only issue is cost. And cost, unfortunately, is the biggest issue of them all.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

and the views allow something the Subways and the tubes and the at-grade metros dont offer

I agree that elevated train rides can be the best way to gain orientation in a new place. LA's elevated light rail sections tend to look pretty nice, especially on the Expo Line.

I don't know why the "California Box Girder" is still so popular in California but rarely seen in the eastern United States, where steel girders still dominate.

There is only one California box girder in the state of Ohio. ODOT built this overpass 1999-2000:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0993...7i16384!8i8192

The concrete box girder was chosen in this location so as to maintain the clearance necessary to someday rebuild the freight rail line that traveled nearby before the highway and new baseball stadium were built.

[Busy Bee]

Probably cost and the ubiquitous "stick with what you know" mentality of most state DOT's.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

I don't know why the "California Box Girder" is still so popular in California but rarely seen in the eastern United States, where steel girders still dominate.

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Probably cost and the ubiquitous "stick with what you know" mentality of most state DOT's.

I've thought about this and there are both political and engineering reasons.

A) California has the expertise needed to reinforce and build formwork for these things especially around active traffic. It's also labor-intensive and the labor is relatively unskilled, which is good if you're trying to create lots of union jobs with minimal training.

B) Cold or wet climates create issues with concrete... the cold and freeze/thaw cycle can lead to severe corrosion of rebar, spalling, and other issues. In a site-cast system like California's, an issue in one place can doom the whole structure since it's all integral.

Other regions of the country use systems that are more modular - steel or precast concrete, like a giant Erector set. It's relatively easy to swap out individual pieces of the structure - for example, IDOT here in Chicago has a 50-year cycle for bridge replacement but a 25-year cycle for bridge decks. You can demolish the concrete bridge deck after the elements have taken their toll, and build a new bridge deck on the existing steel or precast concrete joists. (New technologies/materials have now extended the useful life of bridge decks to 30-35 years).

Sitecast concrete is limited to piers and abutments, and those are usually overbuilt such that corrosion or damage is only superficial and doesn't lead to a dangerous structural failure. Bridge decks are also sitecast (usually) but those are considered sacrificial.

Chicago is now using a precast box girder for the Red/Purple Modernization project... I'm curious to see how it ages. I know CTA will strap a bunch of ugly gutters and downspouts to it to get rain and snowmelt away from the structure as fast as possible.

[Busy Bee]

^ That makes sense. Don't get me going on the downspouts...

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by ardecila

It's relatively easy to swap out individual pieces of the structure

I have also seen many examples where existing overpasses have been widened by building new adjacent piers and lifting additional parallel steel girders into place. I don't think that they can do that with concrete box girders - at least not elegantly - and aesthetics are a big motivation for the mode to begin with.

What is absolutely inexcusable, however, is just how effing ugly everything is getting in the east. Every attempt to dress-up any sort of new interstate highway project (widening, sound walls, infill interchanges, SPUIs, etc.) are usually botched because the designs were concocted by engineers. They need actual design people involved and guiding these designs from the outset of projects.

[Busy Bee]

Oh good lord, if i start talking about hideous faux stone abutmentss and soundwalls i will literally have a stroke. I want to force every single civil engineer and "concerned citizen" to northern Europe to show them how it should look.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by Easy

No they won't have to switch trains. Yes this will be an extension. They drew the map oddly because of the existing terminal station that will be relocated.

[/url]

It looks like Metro will need to backtrack this line to construct the extension as the Atlantic station is past the Beverly bl cut through to south Atlantic. They might need to put a tunnel portal just east of the existing E.LA Civic center station and delete the existing Atlantic station terminus. The last 3 stations on the existing line are far too close anyway. You can literally see the next 2 stations when standing at either. Its walkable and too close for a regional light rail... This winding Light Rail will have a tunnel through E.LA & Commerce with 2 to 3 subway stations; a tunnel with 2 subway stations in Boyle heights, then finally makes it into downtown LA in 45 min-1hr... in a tunnel, then on its way to Santa Monica.

So glad that this line is the final remnants of the Henry Waxman/Zev Y subway and tunnel ban. This is the last light rail compromise from what was originally intended to be the Red Line "Heavy Rail" east side before the ban shackled the amount of Money Metro could spend on "Heavy Rail" & subterranean projects

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

[/url]

So glad that this line is the final remnants of the Henry Waxman/Zev Y subway and tunnel ban. This is the last light rail compromise from what was originally intended to be the Red Line "Heavy Rail" east side to Whittier before the ban shackled the amount of Money Metro could spend on "Heavy Rail" & subterranean projects

Do you have a link to a map? The only 1980s heavy rail plans I've seen were Wilshire to Santa Monica with North Hollywood via Fairfax. I've never seen one where the red line continued into East LA.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

Do you have a link to a map? The only 1980s heavy rail plans I've seen were Wilshire to Santa Monica with North Hollywood via Fairfax. I've never seen one where the red line continued into East LA.

You have to look up the plans before Metro was Metro, when it was the Southern California RTD. The 1960’s 5 corridor plans and later the 1980’s plans which were used to begin construction in time for the 1990’s openings of red/blue. These are the basis for the current lines. The existing redline to North Hollywood made it to fruition as it was done using the original funds for the red line to the west side. Mid construction in the ‘90’s, the bans were implemented and we were left with the stubby purple line western terminus.

The compromises started with cancelling the red line past Western and using those funds to complete the North Hollywood extension first. North Hollywood red line was originally intended to be a second phase after the Wilshire corridor. The Orange Line, which was originally supposed to be a red line extension west from North Hollywood. The east side corridor was supposed to be an east west rapid transit spine formed with the west side (now purple line) and the basis for the entire county’s transit. The green line is also a compromise as it was an easy shoe in to get the old RTD promised South Bay extension connected through an already allocated freeway project.
Here is one source.

http://scsra.org/library/rapid-transit-history/

[Easy]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

It looks like Metro will need to backtrack this line to construct the extension as the Atlantic station is past the Beverly bl cut through to south Atlantic. They might need to put a tunnel portal just east of the existing E.LA Civic center station and delete the existing Atlantic station terminus. The last 3 stations on the existing line are far too close anyway. You can literally see the next 2 stations when standing at either. Its walkable and too close for a regional light rail... This winding Light Rail will have a tunnel through E.LA & Commerce with 2 to 3 subway stations; a tunnel with 2 subway stations in Boyle heights, then finally makes it into downtown LA in 45 min-1hr... in a tunnel, then on its way to Santa Monica.

Metro has described the future relocated Atlantic Station as being similar to the existing Memorial Park station in Pasadena. It will be below grade but not underground. I agree with you that it will likely be West of the existing station, but I haven't seen that mentioned yet.