HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #841  
Old Posted May 29, 2010, 2:12 AM
Kingofthehill's Avatar
Kingofthehill Kingofthehill is offline
International
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oslo
Posts: 4,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by PragmaticIdealist View Post
I just posted something related to this issue in another thread of this forum.

Monorail trains, if they are designed well, might be able to attract a more upscale ridership than subways, which treat transit passengers like mole people.
Hardly surprising coming from you; you're the San Bernardino guy, right?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #842  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2010, 11:50 PM
dktshb's Avatar
dktshb dktshb is offline
Environmental Sabotage
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco/ Los Angeles/ Tahoe
Posts: 5,047
Feds Announce Support for Subway to Sea & 30/10 Project

Thanks for posting this LAB... Awesome news:

Quote:
Feds Announce Support for Subway to Sea & 30/10 Project
By Zach Behrens in News on June 4, 2010 2:50 PM

The chances of a stronger public transit system in Los Angeles took a big step today when U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced federal support for plans to bring a subway down Wilshire Boulevard and of the region's 30/10 plan, which would build 12 transit projects in 10 years.

“Secretary LaHood understands the opportunity to make the 30/10 vision a reality here and around the country," said Senator Barbara Boxer, who heads up the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. "The Secretary is also working with me on finding every opportunity under current law so we can accelerate 30/10 now."

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's 30/10 program would take 30 years-worth of Measure R sales tax funding and build 12 transit projects in 10 years -- that's instead of the 30 years under the current plan -- with the help of a loan from the federal government that would be paid back by Metro.

http://laist.com/2010/06/04/feds_ann..._subway_to.php
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #843  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2010, 12:16 AM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Superb! A bit short of actual funding but it has to be a good sign. Can't wait for the first shovel to hit the ground.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #844  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2010, 5:20 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
But it has to get done before November...otherwise we all know it will have no chance...
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #845  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2010, 6:47 AM
PragmaticIdealist PragmaticIdealist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 337
Does anyone happen to have the image that shows the cross-section of the most recent proposal for monorail service on Wilshire? I can't find the illustration anywhere on-line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #846  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2010, 8:54 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,068
Wow, HUGE for Villaraigosa if he pulls this off.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #847  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2010, 8:42 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Just to let the air out a little: it's actually the "subway to the UC" since it only goes to Westwood. Second, it's cheap to promise this before the election, knowing that there really is no money for it after the election. Let's hope it's not just politics.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #848  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2010, 9:38 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
Just to let the air out a little: it's actually the "subway to the UC" since it only goes to Westwood. Second, it's cheap to promise this before the election, knowing that there really is no money for it after the election. Let's hope it's not just politics.
Realistically, it would have to be a national infrastructure bank with at least some measure of competition for funds (with some of the LA projects undoubtedly scoring well and qualifying, though very doubtfully the entire program). The question is, do the places that stand to benefit (generally, urban regions) have more collective political clout than the places that don't?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #849  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2010, 10:43 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Agreed that the feds should discriminate between good and better proposals (let's assume none are outright bad). Also agreed that there has to be some reasonable access to the same mechanism for other cities.

One positive from the feds managing is that areas that really don't need rail can be given something they really do need as part of the political process and their rail proposals can be deleted. Within LA County there were "me too" projects that had to be handed out to get the votes for the clear winners (my opinion, of course, others may have different views on which are the winners).

But my real concern is that lots of cities are going to get optimistic hints about their chances of getting big projects before the election, but few will actually get funded. (Would a politician really do someting like that?)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #850  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2010, 9:50 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,473
From The Transit Coalition:

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeisenbe
Update: the Santa Ana Branch Corridor project is now being studied by both Metro and OCTA, according to SCAG:

http://www.scag.ca.gov/corridor/perow.htm

The "Pacific Electric Right-of-Way/West Santa Ana Branch Corridor" Alternatives Analysis is planned to start soon:

MARCH THROUGH SUMMER 2010 Study Initiation
SUMMER 2010 TO FALL 2010 Alternatives Development and Refinement
FALL 2010 TO SUMMER 2011 Alternatives Evaluation
FALL 2011 Locally Preferred Alternative

The first community meeting is June 15th:

Community Meeting #1
Tuesday, June 15
6:30 – 8:30 pm
Garden Grove Community Meeting Center
11300 Stanford Avenue
Garden Grove, CA 92840

Others along the route from the Green Line to Santa Ana are planned for this June as well; see the page for details.

The modes being considered include light rail, BRT, commuter rail, and "high speed rail" (not sure who would operate this), with possible connection to Union Station or the Blue Line in the north, and Santa Ana Metrolink in the south.
__________________
“To tell a story is inescapably to take a moral stance.”

— Jerome Bruner

Last edited by Quixote; Jun 11, 2010 at 10:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #851  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2010, 9:17 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
^ Wow, now that's what I call coordination between MTA and OCTA!

Now a full corridor from Downtown to the Santa Ana Metrolink station might actually happen!
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #852  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2010, 9:20 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
This is very interesting (see highlighted area):

From LA Times

Quote:
Mayor Villaraigosa's 30/10 plan: Moving forward

The innovative plan for funding local transit projects moves closer to reality.

By Tim Rutten, June 09, 2010

The 30/10 transit plan is the most important initiative ever proposed by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. If, as seems increasingly likely, it's embraced by Congress, it will become one of the nation's most significant public infrastructure projects..

Essentially, 30/10 proposes leveraging the half-cent sales tax increase to which 68% of Los Angeles County residents agreed when they passed Measure R with federal loans secured by those tax revenues. Those loans would allow the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to build the 12 crucial projects specified in the measure in just 10 years rather than the projected 30.

When Villaraigosa first proposed 30/10 last fall, it seemed like the longest of shots, but his tireless lobbying — and the initiative's self-evident merits — won over powerful congressional allies, particularly Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice) and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who chairs the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, as well as Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. In fact, 30/10 is one of those ideas that gets better under close examination. Consider, for example, that completion of the 12 transit projects would reduce annual particulate emissions by at least 500,000 pounds, reduce annual gasoline consumption by 10.3 million barrels and, by conservative estimates, cut automobile travel by 208 million miles each year.

Over the next decade, it also will create at least 166,000 well-paying construction jobs.

That hasn't been lost on the Obama administration, which continues to struggle under the burden of intractable unemployment. As Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky put it when the MTA board unanimously voted to back Villaraigosa's initiative: "You can't turn the economy of this nation around unless you turn around the economy of California. The antidote to the recession is the 30/10 plan. It's a huge investment in jobs right now.... We're ready to do it, and we're ready to pay for it."

In fact, in a recent conversation with the mayor, President Obama called the proposal "a template for the nation."

It is, however, still an innovation, and Congress needs to approve a novel way of funding it. Late last week, Washington took two long steps in that direction. On Thursday, LaHood wrote to Boxer, promising that the administration would include 30/10 funding "in the next transportation reauthorization bill." The senator also said that LaHood already is "working with me on finding every opportunity under current law so we can accelerate 30/10 now." Equally important, Boxer announced that the Federal Transit Administration, which also reports to LaHood, has agreed that, for funding purposes, it will accept a single environmental review for the entire 9.3-mile subway extension west under Wilshire Boulevard rather than the three different assessments the project normally would require.

"That's a big deal," said Deputy Mayor Jaime de la Vega. "Now we can treat the whole extension as one project as we should … and the savings will be huge." According to De la Vega, construction bids submitted in anticipation of 30/10's accelerated schedule are coming in 15% to 30% under projected costs for Measure R's 12 projects. "With those savings, we actually could build more transit" than the ballot proposition included, he said.


"Eight months ago, people in Washington thought we were nuts," Jeff Carr, Villaraigosa's chief of staff, told The Times this week. "Now, the feds have come around to seeing this as a model for the nation." In fact, LaHood told Boxer in his letter that he shares her belief "that the 30/10 model — leveraging a comprehensive long-range transportation plan and a sustainable local funding stream — has the potential to transform the way we invest in transportation projects across the nation."

Carr and De la Vega point out that this isn't the first time Los Angeles has been at the cutting edge of transit funding. The Alameda Corridor — the dedicated 20-mile rail line that now links the busy ports of San Pedro and Long Beach to the intercontinental railway line east of downtown — was first conceived by local planners and officials in the early 1980s. They began piecing together rights of way, but it took until 1997 for Congress to pass the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, which gave the project what it needed: federal loan guarantees secured by the corridor's future revenues.

Measured against that history, 30/10 has moved forward at the speed of light. Perhaps that's because, as Carr put it, "It's good policy and good politics." How often can you say that?

timothy.rutten@latimes.com
Source: http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun...ten-20100609/2
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #853  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2010, 10:25 PM
OneMetropolis's Avatar
OneMetropolis OneMetropolis is offline
99.9%-Urban .1%-Me
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: San Diego
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
Just to let the air out a little: it's actually the "subway to the UC" since it only goes to Westwood. Second, it's cheap to promise this before the election, knowing that there really is no money for it after the election. Let's hope it's not just politics.
you seem like your very informed about everything so I'll ask you. What election and for what? Also what happened to the subway going to the sea? Why is it going to westwood only now?
__________________
Where you wished you were "SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA"

FINAL FANTASY XIII-2 "Don't play with Lightning"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #854  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2010, 10:30 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneMetropolis View Post
you seem like your very informed about everything so I'll ask you. What election and for what?
AFAIK, in order for 30/10 to be included in the next Transportation bill, it needs approval from Congress.....

Quote:
Also what happened to the subway going to the sea? Why is it going to westwood only now?
Measure R only funds it to UCLA. But that's where the highlighted area of the article I posted gets interesting.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #855  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2010, 6:14 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
JDR said it all, so I'll just ramble on.

The key motivating symbolism is to have the Purple Line extend to the ocean in Santa Monica. But for lack of money and Santa Monica's lack of commitment to density, the first 3 stages only go to UCLA (technically, just past it to the VA). I think that most of us believe that SM ridership will support the extension and that the symboism is also important, but others want priority given to other projects.

The election just refers to the November election and, of course, there is lots of promising going on now, which may disappear after the election when real budgeting takes place.

I don't even dare think that the SM extension might actually get funded within the 30/10 plan.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #856  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2010, 11:06 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
Google Maps has updated LA area, including the views of the completed Gold and U/C Expo Line, as well as a completed LA Live.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #857  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2010, 6:28 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,905
OneMetropolis--

Quote:
you seem like your very informed about everything so I'll ask you. What election and for what? Also what happened to the subway going to the sea? Why is it going to westwood only now?
The re-election of Senator Barbara Boxer is absolutely critical to those who want better tranist and improved mobility in Southern California. Sen. Boxer is in a very competitve re-election campaign against Carly Fiorina. Boxer has been the leading supporter in Congress of Antonio Villaraigosa's 30/10 plan and as Chairwoman of the Environment & Public Works Committee, she has held hearings on the proposal. She is also a leading champion of efforts to reduce greenhouse emissions.

Fiorina presents herself as a moderate but if you want to see a significant federal contribution to transit (and high speed rail) in CA, Barbara Boxer's re-election is crucial.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #858  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2010, 10:51 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist View Post
Fiorina presents herself as a moderate but if you want to see a significant federal contribution to transit (and high speed rail) in CA, Barbara Boxer's re-election is crucial.

Huh? I heard she was a conservative. Regardless, she would NEVER vote for HSR.

Fiorina is also an anti-environmentalist, and claims Boxer is "concerned about the weather" (no, she's concerned about the health of the planet). People like Fiorina will only believe in Global Warming when it's already TOO LATE. Plus, she's evidently proud to be endorsed by Palin the quitter; who btw, has only herself to blame because she put herself in such a spotlight that it turned on her and her family.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #859  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2010, 4:57 AM
bmfarley's Avatar
bmfarley bmfarley is offline
Long-Time Californian
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: California; All Over
Posts: 1,302
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
Google Maps has updated LA area, including the views of the completed Gold and U/C Expo Line, as well as a completed LA Live.
Not only that, but it appears the date of the photog along the East LA Gold Line area is November 15, 2009. In other words, opening day!
__________________
- Think Big, Go Big. Think small, stay small.
- Don't get sucked into a rabbit's hole.
- Freeways build sprawl. Transit builds cities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #860  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2010, 4:46 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,473
While perusing The Transit Coalition forum, I came across this interesting tidbit...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Wentzel
After a Metro planning meeting I was discussing this with a Metro staffer who told me that if Metro doesn't go forward with the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment for federal funding at this time, that Metro has already invested significant time and money studying this corridor and knows that it needs "something" -- plus West Hollywood voted 83% for Measure R which was more than any other city.

I expect that the new maps we are seeing with the Crenshaw Line intersecting with Wilshire at Fairfax, La Cienega and San Vicente are a recognition that if the Santa Monica Blvd. line doesn't go through as part of the Westside subway extension, that we won't see Crenshaw as a straight shot up LaBrea, leaving the high ridership areas near the Grove and Beverly Center and West Hollywood completely out of the rail system.

This map I find highly significant:

I'm hoping this means LACMTA will find ways to fund the West Hollywood extension and aim to have it built concurrently with the Wilshire alignment.
__________________
“To tell a story is inescapably to take a moral stance.”

— Jerome Bruner
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 6:44 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.