LOS ANGELES | Transportation News & Discussion

[Easy]

Originally Posted by LA21st

Heres a better question. Why build the Vermont Subway before you would build the pink line between Hollywood and the expo line?

There won't be any train service in that part of the city, which would serve job centers and tourists.

Without getting into the minutiae of which line most deserves to be built, understand that if LA’s rail system were designed by planners absent the constraints of citizen and political support, that it would look much different. But the reality is that some areas that most need rail are the most against it. South LA largely supports rail and those that don’t support it don’t have the money to stop it.

But IMO the place in LA county that was screwed over the most was West Hollywood. They voted overwhelmingly for rail, would generate good ridership and have absolutely nothing to show for it despite being teased by the pink line.

[LA21st]

It's a missed opportunity for the city. It makes no sense at all. For most cities, a place like West Hollywood would be very high on the priority list to connect with rail service.

I don't see how West Hollywood wouldn't have good ridership for rail. Didn't they underestimate the Expo line numbers?

[caligrad]

Another reason why I say Metros EIRs and feasibility reports are fullllllll of SH**. West Hollywood should have gotten rail years ago. Still hasn't happened. Now...I will admit it and say that the pink line to me has always been meh. For me.... ONLY because I'm partial to a Santa Monica/Sunset line that starts at Union Station, travels down sunset then turns onto Santa Monica and either goes all the way to the beach or links up with the expo line. That route alone is full of "Points of interests" and is dense.

Now. How about a San Vicente street car or LRT that starts at Sunset and then ends at a future Venice/Pico line ? Venice beach is, whether we like it or not, one of LAs biggest tourist traps and is stillllll cut off from the metro system. Make a Venice/Pico line that serves mainly as a feeder line. Starts at Venice Beach, travels down the center of Venice beach Blvd, once it hits San Vicente Blvd, it goes under the weird mall thing and pops back out onto Pico and track down Pico all the way to the Pico/Flower street station with the option to continue on in a booming south park district.

Speaking of street cars. How about an old school street car system running down Hollywood Blvd from La Brea to Virgil where it turns sharp at the vista theater ( Making a big U turn pretty much) and goes down Sunset Through lower Hollywood ? THATS how real street car systems work. Not like the mess being proposed downtown.

[CastleScott]

Speaking of street cars. How about an old school street car system running down Hollywood Blvd from La Brea to Virgil where it turns sharp at the vista theater and goes down sunset ? THATS how real street car systems work. Not like the mess being proposed downtown.

Yes this would really be cool-they could use PCC cars like the ones that are used in SF and Philly (I think even Colorado Springs has some in storage)..

[Busy Bee]

Ding-Ding-Ding


_


_

[Illithid Dude]

My personal streetcar fantasy is a streetcar going down Glendale Boulevard through Echo Park before turning on 2nd Street and stopping at Union Station. The old ROW is still there, and it would service all these great, walkable neighborhoods. It will never happen but a man can dream.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Its a great idea and should be done. It hits a lot of neighborhoods and important spots.

[caligrad]

Yeah. In my vision of street cars. They should be used as feeder lines or for short distances. Lets be honest. Most would rather take any form of train than to be stuck on a bus. I've always been against a downtown streetcar, downtown should focus on LRT/HRT at this point. Even LRT that is put underground.

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Ding-Ding-Ding


_


_

Imagine Hollywood blvd with this running down the center. Tourists and Locals would LOVE it. Not to mention it would serve as a great feeder line to the red line and future/potential lines. It would became an instant tourist attraction and I would want it retro looking just like this. Modern street cars are sooooooo ugly.

And this is what I mean when I say I have issues with metro lack of ambition and enthusiasm. I'm a normal dude with common sense that have laid out a few lines that would not only be greatly used by might, just might, be profitable (for businesses) since public transit rarely makes a profit. But here we are with metros millions of excuses and wasted money on EIRs and Feasibility reports

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by caligrad

Modern street cars are sooooooo ugly.

SOME modern streetcars are ugly. Many are sexy as hell. And yes, who doesn't love the PCC car? Though I actually like the post-war European PCC cars more than the American but I digress...

[caligrad]

^^^ I haven't seen one I liked yet, sadly, Portland's street car make me want to scream WHY !. Now. I love New Orleans streetcars but they are retro. But point me to a modern sexy one

[Busy Bee]

You need to look beyond our shores my dear man...


_

[caligrad]

^^^ Cool-ish. Definitely sexy. But I wouldn't want it for the Hollywood/Sunset street car that I have in mind. Those must be modern on the inside but retro on the outside.

Now.....This would like nice for my San Vicente vision. The line between Sunset and Pico/Venice. It fits with the area more since it would pass through Weho, Beverly Center and Wilshire.

I could also see street cars like that all through the Valley. Especially one linking Glendale with downtown. Something that should have happened by now.

*Edit* Looking at the google maps of the area again. I would propose a Street car that starts at Pico/Venice, travels up San Vicente to Sunset where it makes a right and travels all the way down to where it will have two options to choose from in terms of routes, not long options, but

1. Make a left on Vermont where it makes another left onto Hollywood blvd and travels all the way down to to La Brea where it will end ontop of that weird park/concrete island.

or

2. Instead of making a left on Vermont, continue on and make a left at that weird 3 street intersection where the Vista theater is. From that point, it will start trecking down Hollywood blvd from there. But this option with the wierd intersection might cause some problems. So Vermont might be the best bet.

Thats what i would do.....OR. Keep the San Vicente and Hollywood/Sunset lines seperate and let the Sunset portion continue on, ending between Cory and Phyllis streets where that cluster of midrises are.

[phoenixboi08]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

You need to look beyond our shores my dear man...

Eh, you don’t even have to: I happen to think the Siemens S70/S200 cars are nice enough. Even Brookvilles’s designs are fairly decent.

There are designs that are essentially sold identically - with slight modifications or for use as LRV rather than Trams and vice versus) in both NA and European markets — Siemens seems to have become quite adept at making this work.

Alstom seems to be increasingly interested employing the approach (eg Avelia platform). Just depends by how much and how fast the US/ North American rail market grows, I suppose.

*********************************************************
On this topic, I don’t even think Buy America is really such an impediment, inherently, as is so widely insisted (though, I believe it needs to be tweaked to prefer best-designs over origin, outright, with proper incentives - instead of strict requirements-or-opt-outs - given to work with any local suppliers available): This policy objective - nurturing a domestic industry - just doesn’t work if you’re not investing in actually developing a sizeable market within which a domestic supply chain and industry can adequately develope, adopt to international norms/standards, and scale.

I often think we’d be more successful focusing on the latter issue instead of demanding ripping up the policy itself (unless all this talk about Rust Belt Trump voters was a waste of my attention).

Manufacturers can reuse existing platforms/technology - easier when we have internationally comparative infrastructure and standards - or create new ones for export (see: China and its HSR program).

[electricron]

Originally Posted by phoenixboi08

*********************************************************
On this topic, I don’t even think Buy America is really such an impediment, inherently, as is so widely insisted (though, I believe it needs to be tweaked to prefer best-designs over origin, outright, with proper incentives - instead of strict requirements-or-opt-outs - given to work with any local suppliers available): This policy objective - nurturing a domestic industry - just doesn’t work if you’re not investing in actually developing a sizeable market within which a domestic supply chain and industry can adequately develope, adopt to international norms/standards, and scale.

I often think we’d be more successful focusing on the latter issue instead of demanding ripping up the policy itself (unless all this talk about Rust Belt Trump voters was a waste of my attention).

Manufacturers can reuse existing platforms/technology - easier when we have internationally comparative infrastructure and standards - or create new ones for export (see: China and its HSR program).

I strongly disagree. Just look at one manufacturer to see why. Stadler Rail, based in Switzerland, has proven the ability to meet the 70% domestic requirement of the Build America Act for two of its products, FLIRT and KISS trains. They worked with the FRA cooperatively, they worked developing suppliers for their trains, finding American vendors and European vendors with American factories, and they found an American site they could lease for their final assembly factory. But it did take time and money to accomplish it.

America in return sees new American jobs created assembling new trains. That's why the Build America Act was created in the first place. It's much better economically and politically to spend federal money within America. I'm sure 30% that Stadler earns from these sales will still find its way to Switzerland, but rest assure 70% remains within America with American workers and vendors.

[Car(e)-Free LA]

Originally Posted by electricron

I strongly disagree. Just look at one manufacturer to see why. Stadler Rail, based in Switzerland, has proven the ability to meet the 70% domestic requirement of the Build America Act for two of its products, FLIRT and KISS trains. They worked with the FRA cooperatively, they worked developing suppliers for their trains, finding American vendors and European vendors with American factories, and they found an American site they could lease for their final assembly factory. But it did take time and money to accomplish it.

America in return sees new American jobs created assembling new trains. That's why the Build America Act was created in the first place. It's much better economically and politically to spend federal money within America. I'm sure 30% that Stadler earns from these sales will still find its way to Switzerland, but rest assure 70% remains within America with American workers and vendors.

But that violates every tenant of free trade. Then every other country does the same and nobody is better off or able to leverage economies of scale and specialize. Besides, government isn't a jobs program, and it should look for value in what it purchases, not locality.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by Car(e)-Free LA

But that violates every tenant of free trade. Then every other country does the same and nobody is better off or able to leverage economies of scale and specialize. Besides, government isn't a jobs program, and it should look for value in what it purchases, not locality.

No one really believes in “free” trade. Most believe in “fair” trade. No country can survive financially if they import everything and export nothing.

[Car(e)-Free LA]

Originally Posted by electricron

No one really believes in “free” trade. Most believe in “fair” trade. No country can survive financially if they import everything and export nothing.

I believe in global common market (yep, I'm neoliberal.) Besides, free trade helps, not hurts American manufacturing because we can specialize in certain areas and import where other countries perform better.

[caligrad]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

My personal streetcar fantasy is a streetcar going down Glendale Boulevard through Echo Park before turning on 2nd Street and stopping at Union Station. The old ROW is still there, and it would service all these great, walkable neighborhoods. It will never happen but a man can dream.

That's actually interesting. Where would you have it start? I would imagine in Glendale ? I would have it start on Brand at Doran st. Where it follows the Brand/Glendale route the entire way to 2nd street where it would somehow find its way to the front of One Santa fe where the new Red/Purple line station may or may not go/happen.

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

Its a great idea and should be done. It hits a lot of neighborhoods and important spots.

If you were talking about my Sunset/Santa Monica line, I think its crazy how metro isn't using their common sense with that one. It would pass Vin Scully ave... If the city was smart, they would team up with The Dodgers and build a people mover/tram between sunset and the front of Dodger stadium. People for sure would use it. I know people always say "Well stadiums/Arenas are only used x amount of time during the year, blah blah blah" but Dodger Stadium lately has been used for a lot, other than sports. A train passing by on Sunset would help with Traffic. Especially if the train ended in front of/under Union Station.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by Car(e)-Free LA

I believe in global common market (yep, I'm neoliberal.) Besides, free trade helps, not hurts American manufacturing because we can specialize in certain areas and import where other countries perform better.

NAFTA is dying, UK pulling out of EU, looks like a global common market is dead on arrival.
The Buy America Act isn’t all that new, it has been around for a while - since 1933. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buy_American_Act

The Buy American Act is not to be confused with the very similarly named "Buy America Act" that came into effect in 1983. The latter, a provision of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982, is 49 U.S.C., § 5323, and applies only to mass-transit-related procurements valued over US$100,000 and funded at least in part by federal grants.

There are plenty of foreign items valued less than $100,000 that can still be purchased “freely”.

[Busy Bee]

Surely you don't believe that Brexit happened because Brits wanted out the European common market...

That's like saying a couple got divorced because they no longer wanted a dual income household.