HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #5001  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2018, 11:05 PM
NSMP NSMP is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 517
There are a bunch of inaccuracies in there. Cities are required by Metro to cover 3% of project cost, not 5%. The trigger for accelerating schedule is an additional 10% (13% total) not 30%. And despite what WeHo may have stated, they have not committed those extra funds to the project as of yet. So what have they done for the project? Nothing more than a considerable deal of whining and lobbying. The former is commonplace and the latter is something most cities can’t afford, and not a reason to bend to a tiny city’s whims.

I don’t want a street level rail line built at the corner of their city; I want grade separated rail. As it so happens the La Brea route has the least mileage through the city, less than .4 miles, such that it would probably be possible to run that segment below grade if necessary without blowing up the budget for the project. Same can’t be said for SV or LC.

WeHo has really gotten carried away. Regardless, the real obstacle to this project being built correctly is, has been, and will remain the city of Los Angeles.
__________________
https://redlinereader.wordpress.com/ - Covering Transit Issues in Los Angeles
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5002  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2018, 12:15 AM
Will O' Wisp Will O' Wisp is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: San Diego
Posts: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSMP View Post
There are a bunch of inaccuracies in there. Cities are required by Metro to cover 3% of project cost, not 5%. The trigger for accelerating schedule is an additional 10% (13% total) not 30%. And despite what WeHo may have stated, they have not committed those extra funds to the project as of yet. So what have they done for the project? Nothing more than a considerable deal of whining and lobbying. The former is commonplace and the latter is something most cities can’t afford, and not a reason to bend to a tiny city’s whims.

I don’t want a street level rail line built at the corner of their city; I want grade separated rail. As it so happens the La Brea route has the least mileage through the city, less than .4 miles, such that it would probably be possible to run that segment below grade if necessary without blowing up the budget for the project. Same can’t be said for SV or LC.

WeHo has really gotten carried away. Regardless, the real obstacle to this project being built correctly is, has been, and will remain the city of Los Angeles.
Really? I'll have looked up the funding triggers again since I remember reading something to that effect. But since your rather excellent blog would be one of those sources anyway, I'll defer to you unless I find something different.

Regardless of the exact amount WeHo puts in though, I fear this is a coming battle. WeHo has made their preferences very well known, and a very big stink will be made if the new line only runs through a corner of their town, grade separated or not.

Let's be clear in that I agree with you about the viability of SV and LC, but I get the sneaking suspicion this process isn't going fast or simple. Not to mention Metro has shown an unfortunate willingness to blow project budgets in the face of parochial local concerns already, just look at how the WSAB is spending an extra billion sinking the line underground just to keep little tokyo from complaining about the construction.
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 1:33 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.