HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #5961  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2022, 5:26 AM
hughfb3 hughfb3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
The technical proposal states "using a smaller vehicle size, which allows us to reduce the internal tunnel diameter to less than 40 feet." But in addition to systems that use Bombardier's Innovia stock (JFK Airport, Vancouver Skytrain, Kuala Lumpur), they also mention projects in Singapore, Sydney, and Montreal. Singapore's rolling stock for its automated lines is even wider than our Bredas, while Sydney and Montreal's are 1/2-inch narrower.

Budgeting for a 15-foot side platform and 3-foot emergency walkway, it would seem to me that 10-foot-wide trains — or at least 9-9.5-foot width — are feasible. Bombardier's Innovia rolling stock seems to be very customizable, with Beijing's Capital Airport Express trains being 10.5 feet wide.
Hey Quixote, sent you a PM!

Bombardier's Innovia line is so versatile. It would behoove us in LA County to advocate Inglewood's Mayor James T Butts and LA Mayor/Metro Chair Garcetti consider using the Bechtel proposal's versatile Innovia rolling rolling stock for both the Inglewood People Mover and the Sepulveda pass as it plays both people mover at major airports; including JFK as well as major/well respected metro lines like Vancouvers's skytrain.

It could lead to a one seat ride from the Valley to Inglewood's sports and entertainment area and continue on the unfunded Harbor subdivision to DTLA

My friend @StanfordCaldera created this beautiful map



And I created this ugly map of a dream I have...



I dream about this line being quad tracked at least around certain stations that could allow express service from LAX to downtown that could charge a premium $$ to help fund the construction of this and other lines In my dream it’s almost completely Elevated because only in LA do you get this when riding an elevated train or waiting on the elevated platform for your next train ...







ONLY AVAILABLE ELEVATED IN L.A.

#ElevatedInLA #RideElevatedLA

Last edited by hughfb3; Jun 27, 2022 at 7:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5962  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2022, 6:05 AM
hughfb3 hughfb3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 660
Also... who else is obsessed with the classically designed station canopies and lighting fixtures of the Gold line foothill stations??? SIMPLE, CLEAN, TIMELESS ELEGANCE

I feel like I'm taken back in time to the 1940's Southern California where the Pacific Electric railway and the Los Angeles Railway was the world's largest... Or like I'm riding an attraction at Disney World that's based off of a cartoon that was in the 1940's.. It's so... Train like!!! My dream is to reconstruct much of those systems AND have a comprehensive elevated/subterranean rapid transit system where appropriate. Keep Light Rail on the ground and have these cute stations sprinkled throughout gorgeous tree-lined and/or mountain viewed stations across the basin...

Who wouldn't want to wait a few minutes at stations that look like this in L.A.??


The first phase from LA to Pasadena has green canopies and the second phase to Asuza has reddish canopies... Anyone know what color phase 3's palatte will use???


With the regional connector soon to be completed; we can develop brand new grade separated elevated/subway rapid lines designed for speed and high capacity for longer distance cross-county trips, while beefing up the slower more pedestrian-focused central city light rail/streetcar systems to create a true car free/car light environment unique to LA's history, beautiful topography and weather.

I took these two pictures on Opening Day March 5, 2016...



Look at the view of those mountains from the station platform... what an EPIC treat!



...and you best believe I will be at opening day for the extension to Pomona... and Montclair... and the regional connector... and... whew, our list is getting quite long... Ive been at every rail grand opening in LA since the Gold Line East Side opened in 2009

Last edited by hughfb3; Jun 27, 2022 at 7:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5963  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2022, 7:01 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by LineDrive View Post
This is great news but it’s still woefully short of what the Sepulveda line should be. This line is a lynch pin for Los Angeles transit. It’ll be the difference maker between whether or not LA becomes a major mass transit region or if it’s a mode of transit reserved for novelists and the low incomes.

Of all the lines this is the one that no expanse can be spared and no luxury past over. Of course knowing Metro they’ll botch it but ideally… first and foremost the whole line should be Subway. It should travel maybe even a few miles NORTH of Van Nuys MetroLink. There should be at least 3 stations in the valley. Transitions to LRT ready Orange, Expo, Crenshaw, Purple and the boondoggle ESFV line need fo be SEAMLESS (under 1-2 mins, inside the fare gates etc). And this line should terminate in a subway station directly between SoFi and Intuit - if done right - that station could literally add 300k riders a year minimum.
I get not building the whole thing at once, but I just hope Bechtel doesn’t build it in a way that precludes any future extension north. I have a feeling once a lot of people see this thing up and running only then will they be okay with upzoning Van Nuys Blvd.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5964  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2022, 7:32 PM
homebucket homebucket is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 5,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
With each car being approximately 72 feet long, they might as well plan on procuring 75-foot cars to match the length of the Bredas and forthcoming HR4000s. Bombardier Innovias also tend to have a less boxy silhouette, with the curvilinear rooflines offering more clearance within the tunnel.

It's great that some prudence is being shown in planning this project (being mindful of phase 2), but I just hope that they haven't forgotten that this line, although it will be a stand-alone, will still exist as part of a broader network.
Any word on when the HR4000s will be arriving?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5965  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2022, 10:05 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,539
__________________
“To tell a story is inescapably to take a moral stance.”

— Jerome Bruner
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5966  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2022, 11:12 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,539
Something is very wrong with the culture we have in place if it takes 15 years to fund, design, and construct a "BRT" line. And this is with a 2% sales tax (across a county of 10 million people) dedicated toward transportation improvements with no expiration date. It's actually a blessing in disguise that we aren't able to put another countywide sales tax on the ballot because it'd be a continuation of the same bullshit approach of pork barrel, highways, and the worst of them all... "local return" funds. We can thank Move LA for that, and the fact that they're in bed with BYD... fuck them.

And once Metro finally manages to get all this built (mostly LRT and BRT projects which won't spur fundamental change), they'll just continue with their self-negating practices like reducing headways to 20 minutes after 8 p.m. or debacles like the Centinela grade-separation project.

But hey, phases 1 and 2 of the Purple Line Extension are only 2-3 years away.
__________________
“To tell a story is inescapably to take a moral stance.”

— Jerome Bruner
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5967  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2022, 12:32 AM
craigs's Avatar
craigs craigs is offline
Birds Aren't Real!
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,353
Union Station - Coachella rail line clears a hurdle

Plans call for adding five new stations along a 144-mile corridor

Steven Sharp
Urbanize Los Angeles
July 18, 2022







Following a public hearing held on July 13, the Riverside County Transportation Commission has adopted a service plan for a new passenger rail link between the Coachella Valley and Los Angeles.

The proposed Coachella Valley-San Gorgonio Pass corridor would span approximately 144 miles, linking the City of Coachella with Union Station in Downtown Los Angeles. Under current plans, two daily round trip trains
would serve the corridor, including one morning departure and one afternoon departure.

Between Los Angeles and the City of Colton, the rail line would make use of existing tracks owned by BNSF and Metro, as well as stations in Fullerton and Riverside. Moving east into San Bernardino County, the new
passenger rail service hinges on upgrades to the Union Pacific Railroad Yuma Subdivision, including the addition of a third main line track, new crossovers and sidings, a new railroad bridge at the Santa Ana River,
and various other infrastructure and grade separation projects.

Likewise, plans call for the construction of up to five new stations within Riverside County, supplementing an existing stop in Palm Springs. The new stations would be located in or near:
  • the Loma Linda/Redlands area;
  • the communities of Beaumont, Banning, and Cabazon;
  • near Cathedral City, Thousand Palms, Agua Caliente Casino, Rancho Mirage, and Palm Desert; and
  • the City of Indio;
  • the City of Coachella.
While the adoption of a service plan is a key milestone, more planning remains - including additional environmental documentation relating to the construction of the proposed infill stations and new main line track.

An official project website does not list an anticipated timeline for delivery, although it has previously been reported that the range of improvements would cost approximately $1 billion
and could begin construction within 10 years of completing its environmental study.

Last edited by craigs; Jul 19, 2022 at 12:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5968  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2022, 7:54 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,539
A 100% at-grade LRT line (albeit with a bazillion stops) costing $3.6 billion. Inflation or not, this is absurd and should be given the axe just like the Gold Line extension along SR-60. The money would be better spent on extending the Sepulveda line farther north to San Fernando (another 2-3 stations at most) and implementing high-quality BRT infrastructure.
Quote:
LA Metro update on East San Fernando Valley rail project to FTA on 6/1/22. Budget updated to reflect FTA’s cost estimate, now $3.57b (vs $2.9b in prior report).
https://twitter.com/numble/status/15...Cgtb-nrfoqAAAA
__________________
“To tell a story is inescapably to take a moral stance.”

— Jerome Bruner
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5969  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2022, 3:42 AM
Will O' Wisp Will O' Wisp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: San Diego
Posts: 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
A 100% at-grade LRT line (albeit with a bazillion stops) costing $3.6 billion. Inflation or not, this is absurd and should be given the axe just like the Gold Line extension along SR-60. The money would be better spent on extending the Sepulveda line farther north to San Fernando (another 2-3 stations at most) and implementing high-quality BRT infrastructure.


https://twitter.com/numble/status/15...Cgtb-nrfoqAAAA
That's not LRT. That's a streetcar with good PR.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5970  
Old Posted Jul 25, 2022, 8:13 PM
hughfb3 hughfb3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
A 100% at-grade LRT line (albeit with a bazillion stops) costing $3.6 billion. Inflation or not, this is absurd and should be given the axe just like the Gold Line extension along SR-60. The money would be better spent on extending the Sepulveda line farther north to San Fernando (another 2-3 stations at most) and implementing high-quality BRT infrastructure.
That’s because LA’s current stock of LRT trains is a heavy bunch and requires deeper supported rail; necessitating utility relocation along corridors, AND... high-level boarding juices up $$ with raised platforms at stations. They could just build a true streetcar with lighter (weight) trains and non-level boarding platforms for much cheaper and less time… hello DTLA, Hollywood Bl, and yes… Van Nuys Bl

For weight comparison of Streetcar train vs. Light Rail let's use Portland, OR as they have extensive use of both...

Streetcar train weight: Skoda 10T = 28.8 Tons
Light Rail train weight: Siemens S70 = 49 Tons

One of them gets built faster and cheaper with the least disruption... Can you guess which one?? Although with that tradeoff comes a smaller vehicle with less capacity... the question could be, could LA get away with building a lower capacity streetcar on Van Nuys bl for cheaper??? Light Rail is neither light in weight or capacity and should really change its name

Light Rail really should be called “Heavy Street Rail Transit” (HSRT)

Last edited by hughfb3; Jul 26, 2022 at 4:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5971  
Old Posted Jul 26, 2022, 6:35 AM
caligrad's Avatar
caligrad caligrad is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 1,659
With the "Massive budget surplus" we saw, was there no way to use that money to repave street and throw funds towards metro projects in the big cities? We heard about soooo much money but where did all that money go? the stimulus checks didn't even put a dent into it. LA could have done a lot with 10 billion, even if it went all towards LRT.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5972  
Old Posted Jul 26, 2022, 7:42 PM
numble numble is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by caligrad View Post
With the "Massive budget surplus" we saw, was there no way to use that money to repave street and throw funds towards metro projects in the big cities? We heard about soooo much money but where did all that money go? the stimulus checks didn't even put a dent into it. LA could have done a lot with 10 billion, even if it went all towards LRT.
They agreed to release $4.2 billion for high-speed rail, and another $10.8 billion for transportation over 4 years. Generally Southern California gets 50-60% of any statewide funding, and LA usually gets 80-90% of Southern California funding, so that may mean around $5 billion or so for Los Angeles.

If there are more surpluses in future years, that could mean more money for LA.

https://sbud.senate.ca.gov/sites/sbu...20Summary3.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5973  
Old Posted Jul 31, 2022, 6:25 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,539
Purple Line extension cost:

Phase 1
Local funding: $1,559.79
Total cost: $2,821.96

Phase 2
Local funding: $1,143.24
Total cost: $2,499.24

Phase 3
Local funding: $2,129.39
Total cost: $3,599.27


Total cost of this 9.1-mile HRT subway extension that will help change the urban structure of the city:

$8,920.47

What we paid using local funds:

$4,832.42 (54.2%)


For the $3.6 billion we want to spend for the ESFV streetcar, you could probably fund a Purple Line extension to SM and Sepulveda up to San Fernando — splitting that amount in half $1.8 billion and assuming both would qualify for federal New Starts grants.

This is outrageous.
__________________
“To tell a story is inescapably to take a moral stance.”

— Jerome Bruner
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:35 AM.

     

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