HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2009, 7:30 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
LOS ANGELES | Transportation News & Discussion

Measure R, the half-percent sales tax increase approved by Los Angeles County voters in November 2008, goes into effect today, marking the onset of an ambitious 30-year effort to expand and improve mass transit throughout Los Angeles County. Thus, I felt it appropriate to begin this thread on such a symbolic occasion. This thread will highlight projects beyond the scope of Measure R and will include all modes of public transport.
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2009, 7:32 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
L.A. Metro Breaks Ground on Metro Orange Line Extension to Chatsworth

First Official Measure R Construction Project Begins

June 24, 2009

Marking the first official project to begin construction under the new voter-approved Measure R transportation sales tax, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) today broke ground on a four-mile extension of the highly successful Metro Orange Line.

The extension of L.A. County’s premier dedicated busway will begin at the line’s current terminus in Canoga Park and extend four miles north to the Chatsworth Metrolink/Amtrak Station. The extension will add new north-south mobility options in the West San Fernando Valley and create a vital connection between Metro Orange Line service and the broader inter-urban rail system spanning all counties of Southern California and beyond.

City and county officials today met with Sully-Miller Contracting Co. at the Chatsworth Station for groundbreaking ceremonies on the first phase of construction – a north parking lot that will replace a south parking lot needed to accommodate current train passengers during construction. Later construction work on the alignment will commence in late 2009/early 2010. The busway extension is projected to open in mid-2012, more than three years ahead of schedule as a result of Measure R’s passage.

“Angelenos want more public transportation options, and we're making that a reality beginning with the extension of the Metro Orange Line,” said Los Angeles Mayor and Metro Board Chair Antonio Villaraigosa. “The voters made their voices heard loud and clear when they overwhelmingly passed Measure R, and now we're able to deliver this project three years ahead of schedule. This is the first of many projects now in the pipeline that will dramatically improve regional mobility, create news jobs and generate new economic opportunities for all Angelenos.”

L.A. County Supervisor and Metro Board Member Zev Zaroslavsky was among the first public officials within Los Angeles to advocate for a local dedicated Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system. “The extension to Chatsworth will build on the success that has made the Metro Orange Line one of the most renowned busway projects in the nation,” Yaroslavsky said. “We’ve already proven that you can create a premium rapid bus service that is both affordable and flexible enough to serve the growing needs of today’s transit riders. Now even more commuters stand to benefit from connections with the Valley’s best short-cut.”

In November 2008, Measure R was approved by a two-thirds majority of voters, committing a projected $40 billion to traffic relief and transportation upgrades throughout the county over the next 30 years. The tax goes into effect July 1, 2009. While the project is a Measure R deliverable, it is expected to receive additional State funding that will free up Measure R project funding for later use in transportation improvements within the same subregion.

The tax measure will help fund dozens of critical transit and highway projects, create more than 210,000 new annual full-time equivalent construction jobs and infuse an estimated $32 billion back into the local economy, according to estimates by the nonprofit Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC).

The LAEDC also estimates that the $215.6 million construction phase of the Metro Orange Line Extension project will create 3,000 annual full-time equivalent jobs as well as infuse $461 million in direct and indirect business revenues back into the local economy.

When complete, the Metro Orange Line extension will transform the Metro-owned right-of-way into an attractive landscaped busway similar to the existing Metro Orange Line corridor. Major features will include four station stops at Sherman Way, Roscoe, Nordhoff and Chatsworth, a new 207-space park & ride facility at the Sherman Way Station, landscaping and parallel bicycle and pedestrian paths.

“I have worked for and supported the Metro Orange Line extension from day one," said L.A. City Council Member Greig Smith. “It will dramatically improve the public transit options available to residents and employees in the Northwest San Fernando Valley and Ventura County and offer safe, fast, inexpensive transportation in a few years, not decades.”

The design-build project also will include an elevated bridge at Lassen Street for buses to safely pass over Metrolink and Amtrak train tracks as they enter Chatsworth Station. Metro also will build privacy walls where the busway is built next to residential properties, as well as install new traffic signals and other roadway improvements.

The extension will provide high-capacity transit linkages between major local activity centers, and is expected to help relieve congestion on North-South arterial streets.

“The expansion of the Orange Line is going to benefit the northern part of the San Fernando Valley,” said L.A. City Council Member Dennis P. Zine. “Providing commuters with efficient transit options helps the entire community. The busway is going to move people more effectively between their residences, workplaces, schools, and shopping centers. The Metro Orange Line extension will also reduce negative environmental impacts by removing cars from the crowded roadways and saving fuel.”

Chatsworth Station has the second highest daily boardings on Metrolink’s 70-mile Oxnard to Los Angeles Ventura County Line, with 4,940 average weekday boardings. Only boardings at Metrolink’s Simi Valley Station are higher. Additionally, Amtrak’s San Diego to San Luis Obispo Pacific Surfliner trains logged nearly 54,000 boardings at Chatsworth Station last year. Other transit services at Chatsworth Station include several Metro Local bus lines, LADOT Commuter Express, Simi Valley Transit and Santa Clarita Transit.

“The Metro Orange Line extension is an example of regional cooperation that will create opportunities for Metrolink and Metro riders,” said Richard Katz, Metro Board Member and Metrolink Board Vice Chair. “The Chatsworth Metrolink station is becoming the place to go in the West Valley for all of your transit options.”

The Metro Orange line has exceeded ridership estimates since its first day of operation in October 2005. It carries an average of 22,000 boardings per day. By the year 2030, the extension is expected to generate 9,000 new average weekday boardings.
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2009, 8:31 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
Cool video of the subway portion of the Gold Line Eastside Extension...

Video Link
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2009, 4:23 PM
JDRCRASH's Avatar
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,721
I've never heard of the west Santa Ana Branch corridor before, so I have a few questions:

Is it going to be AG Light Rail?

Also, it's ever extended into Orange County, will it stop at the Santa Ana Metrolink station nearby?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2009, 6:52 PM
DJM19 DJM19 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,367
Is it at all on the table that the orange line might eventually become rail?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2009, 9:23 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
Is it going to be AG Light Rail?
It is currently being studied as a potential grade-separated maglev corridor, but that is not the best option IMO because of the greater stop spacing it would require.

Quote:
Also, it's ever extended into Orange County, will it stop at the Santa Ana Metrolink station nearby?
Yes.
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2009, 9:37 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJM19 View Post
Is it at all on the table that the orange line might eventually become rail?
Yes, but that won't be for a while. The Valley already has Metrolink service, so BRT will feed into it. Would I say it's an effective transit solution, probably not. It'll do for now, though.
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Jul 1, 2009, 11:12 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
JULY 1, 2009 | Expo Line

From The Transit Coalition:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Here is an exhilarating Expo development. These pictures are taken at Normandie Ave looking west this morning. They are laying subballast (fine gravel), which is the first phase of track installation. The next will be putting ties and rail and pouring ballast (coarse gravel) on top of it.





Also in the pictures notice the right-of-way curbs as well as the ballast-retaining curbs. Between the right-of-way curbs and ballast-retaining curbs will be landscaping.

I've also noticed work going on La Brea bridge west abutment and east bridge forms. They have cast the curbs for the Ballona Creek street bridge. Also, power lines at La Cienega seem to have been gone, except for some low-hanging lines east of the street, which seem to be fiber-optic lines, hence they are not dangerous to work near with and probably will not be removed as a result.

A lot of utility work is still taking place near Vermont Ave, which probably won't be completed for another two moths at the least. Phase 1 utility work has been extensive, probably because the line is adjacent to the East Central Interceptor Sewer.
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2009, 12:57 AM
JDRCRASH's Avatar
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,721
^ I thought the gravel comes before the track layout?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2009, 1:00 AM
JDRCRASH's Avatar
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Skyscraper Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 7,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westsidelife View Post
Yes, but that won't be for a while. The Valley already has Metrolink service, so BRT will feed into it. Would I say it's an effective transit solution, probably not. It'll do for now, though.
And if turned into a AG Light Rail, won't it be connected to the Gold Line?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2009, 1:11 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
^ No, it would connect with the Red Line in NoHo.
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods

Last edited by Quixote; Jul 2, 2009 at 2:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2009, 6:50 AM
Kingofthehill's Avatar
Kingofthehill Kingofthehill is offline
International
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oslo
Posts: 3,876
I wish Metro would implement more BRT's in the basin; Venice, Slauson, La Brea, etc, would all benefit from a BRT. Bus transit on those routes (well, anything west of Western, really), is a real pain, and something like an Orange Line on any one of the main streets over there would make using transit infinitely times easier.

Oh, and what is ever going to be done with Vermont? Severely overcrowded buses running at ridiculous frequencies (3-4 minutes during rush hour). If Metro really cared about poor folks, they'd be tunneling something down Vermont, instead of pursuing an LRT down the relatively affluent Crenshaw Blvd (especially seeing how the Crenshaw Rapid doesn't even have 15,000 riders; Vermont has 50,000+, not counting subway transfers from the several stations along its route).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2009, 9:29 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
^ LA could use a streetcar system similar to the one in Toronto. Perhaps a resurrection of the Red Car system?

As for Vermont, the ultimate transit solution is an HRT extension of the Red Line. It would definitely be much more cost-effective than Crenshaw, but I certainly wouldn't underestimate the potential ridership with all the connections. Here's what it could ultimately end up becoming:


By Wright Concept
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods

Last edited by Quixote; Jul 2, 2009 at 9:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2009, 9:49 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
BTW, this is the MTA's Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), though it is slightly dated:

__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2009, 10:38 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westsidelife View Post
^ LA could use a streetcar system similar to the one in Toronto. Perhaps a resurrection of the Red Car system?
Or at the very least Trolleybuses and more dedicated Bus Only Lanes.

CRENSHAW CORRIDOR

As for Crenshaw Corridor as currently truncated doesn't work. However when extended even coupled with the West Hollywood Santa Monica Blvd subway option for the Westside Corridor study that could provide a needed North-South Corridor.




VERMONT CORRIDOR


Not from Metro's plans but a personal fantasy map.

I definitely agree with the merits of a Vermont Corridor given that there are sections that do not need to be underground due to the wider street widths. A good study needs to be done to show how this can be better utilized as a Regional transit corridor. Either by using a piece of a railroad right-of-way at the south end of the line as Crenshaw Corridor has the advantage of using a railroad right of way to reach LAX and tie into the existing rail transit infrastructure with relative ease via the Green Line and possibly Expo.
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2009, 11:09 PM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,583
On that map, the Pink Line that you have needs to connect to the other three lines to the south of it, no? it would be a great way to tie the southern portion of the system together.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2009, 11:47 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wright Concept View Post
CRENSHAW CORRIDOR

As for Crenshaw Corridor as currently truncated doesn't work. However when extended even coupled with the West Hollywood Santa Monica Blvd subway option for the Westside Corridor study that could provide a needed North-South Corridor.

What's with the dashed green line branching off from Crenshaw? I thought that option was already eliminated from further consideration?

Quote:
VERMONT CORRIDOR


Not from Metro's plans but a personal fantasy map.

I definitely agree with the merits of a Vermont Corridor given that there are sections that do not need to be underground due to the wider street widths. A good study needs to be done to show how this can be better utilized as a Regional transit corridor. Either by using a piece of a railroad right-of-way at the south end of the line as Crenshaw Corridor has the advantage of using a railroad right of way to reach LAX and tie into the existing rail transit infrastructure with relative ease via the Green Line and possibly Expo.
Why isn't this project being studied right now? Is it because of the high cost and the prioritization of the Westside Extension? BTW, what is the cost of subway vs. elevated?
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2009, 12:03 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan View Post
On that map, the Pink Line that you have needs to connect to the other three lines to the south of it, no? it would be a great way to tie the southern portion of the system together.
Wright's map doesn't accurately depict the MTA's plans. For instance, the Crenshaw Corridor would terminate at the Green Line rather than continue on to the South Bay. It's the Green Line itself that is to be extended farther south.*

The corridor you are referring to is part of the Harbor Subdivision study and it would terminate in either San Pedro or Long Beach.**


*Wright, don't you fault that idea? Don't lines with branches screw with the headways?

**Wright, which one would you say makes more sense?
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods

Last edited by Quixote; Jul 3, 2009 at 12:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2009, 12:23 AM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westsidelife View Post
What's with the dashed green line branching off from Crenshaw? I thought that option was already eliminated from further consideration?
It is, I sketched this out about 3 years ago before the recent changes. I forgot to place a caveat note under the image.



Quote:
Why isn't this project being studied right now... Is it because of the high cost and the prioritization of the Westside Extension? BTW, what is the cost of subway vs. elevated?
Yes. The problem with Vermont corridor right now compared to Wilshire is that it has the transit dependency and ridership on its own to justify it as maybe a streetcar or even LRT but it's dependent on a Downtown and Wilshire corridor connection to make it work because Wilshire Corridor contains the jobs that would stimulate the ridership for a Subway. The Vermont corridor minus USC/Coliseum or extending it much further south into the South Bay (current Metro idea is Vermont corridor from Wilshire to the Green line)

I don't have exact costs but it works out to something like At-grade rail as the base value, elevated rail is about 2.5-3 times the cost of the base, subway is 5-6 times the cost of the base and twice as much as elevated.
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?

Last edited by Wright Concept; Jul 3, 2009 at 12:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
   
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:52 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.