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
     
     
  #1661  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2011, 4:40 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist View Post
This is certainly good news that will help put people back to work sooner by building infrastructure that will improve mobility for Southern California residents and visitors.

Feds to expedite approval time for Crenshaw/LAX light rail

By Nick Green
10/11/2011
Daily Breeze

"The Obama administration announced Tuesday it will cut red tape to shorten the approval time for the Crenshaw/LAX light rail line by several months.

The 8.5-mile project will extend the existing Green Line closer to Los Angeles International Airport with the construction of a new station at Aviation and Century boulevards.

Construction is expected to start in 2013..."

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_19091765
Unfortunately this is govt. think working again. They expedite the redtape (probably good) and the savings will be used to add stations that were already cut as being not that useful.

btw, why not cut the red tape for all projects? Is this just a selected political gift given only those who vote on the right side?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1662  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2011, 5:09 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,282
pesto:
Quote:
btw, why not cut the red tape for all projects? Is this just a selected political gift given only those who vote on the right side?
This is probably good policy and isn't a political gift. The President also selected projects in Texas, Utah, South Dakota, and North Dakota as well for expedited environmental review. These are all red states that are firmly Republican and will not be even slightly competitive next November.

Dakota Prairie and Little Missouri National Grasslands, North Dakota and South Dakota
Next Generation Air Transportation System Infrastructure Project, Texas
Provo Westside Connector, Utah

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-...-projects-be-e
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1663  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2011, 5:59 PM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
Unfortunately this is govt. think working again. They expedite the redtape (probably good) and the savings will be used to add stations that were already cut as being not that useful.

btw, why not cut the red tape for all projects? Is this just a selected political gift given only those who vote on the right side?
the Leimert Station was cut due to lack of funding, not because it wouldnt be a useful station. im against undergrounding the line but i support the Liemert park station. thats the heart of the community and should have rail access. there is plenty of potential in that area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1664  
Old Posted Oct 12, 2011, 9:36 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is online now
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
btw, why not cut the red tape for all projects? Is this just a selected political gift given only those who vote on the right side?
I'm assuming this handful of projects is a trial balloon. If the environmental review can be managed successfully on these, then the President may direct that each project go through an expedited review.

I was thinking earlier today about how a project could do environmental-impact after the fact, by establishing a fund to deal with mitigation as part of the project budget, and then dealing with problems as they occur.

In the vast majority of cases, the huge impacts of a project can be predicted fairly easily and factored into the design. The small-scale impacts that affect only 4 or 5 properties can be mitigated after the bulk of construction.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1665  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2011, 4:25 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
I'm assuming this handful of projects is a trial balloon. If the environmental review can be managed successfully on these, then the President may direct that each project go through an expedited review.

I was thinking earlier today about how a project could do environmental-impact after the fact, by establishing a fund to deal with mitigation as part of the project budget, and then dealing with problems as they occur.

In the vast majority of cases, the huge impacts of a project can be predicted fairly easily and factored into the design. The small-scale impacts that affect only 4 or 5 properties can be mitigated after the bulk of construction.
This is a fair reply. The other replies are govt. thinking again: if you have money, spend it. In real life people learn not to spend on everything they want; if they do, they go broke or don't have funds when real needs come up. Same for govt.

Your comment on remediation smacks of libertarianism (which is to say, good economics). But if you decide to do it for rail projects, why not for large-scale polluters: let them pollute and pay-off local homeowners if that yields a better overal result. The problem is that the right to be left untroubled in your home runs deep in Americans, even when it is easily remediable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1666  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2011, 5:02 PM
BrighamYen's Avatar
BrighamYen BrighamYen is offline
I ♥ DTLA
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: L.A.
Posts: 6,500
A Letter from a SF Visitor to LA

Steve Villano, a visitor from SF, writes to me about his first time experience riding the LA metro and he offers some suggestions on how to improve the experience.


"The ride on Metro was easy, but a bit strange."

Continue reading



Photo by Brigham Yen
__________________
DTLA RISING | With Brigham Yen
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1667  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2011, 1:54 AM
ayesmooth ayesmooth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1
a proposal

Hello fellow transiteers of Los Angeles,
After countless hours waiting to merge onto the 5 north from the 110 north freeway, I figured out a faster method of transport for that route: turtle costume and running shoes... http://youtu.be/bYWzIhXwxr0
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1668  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2011, 5:04 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrighamYen View Post
Steve Villano, a visitor from SF, writes to me about his first time experience riding the LA metro and he offers some suggestions on how to improve the experience.


"The ride on Metro was easy, but a bit strange."

Continue reading



Photo by Brigham Yen
His germ preoccupation is a bit troublesome and pulls his other comments into doubt. These narratives often tell you more about the reviewer than about what he is reviewing.

The signage is a bit confusing in various places; this always suprises me because it is so easy to remediate. Just take someone new to the system and walk with him observing where he is confused. Of course, this isn't just an LA problem.

Cleanliness and good repairs is always desirable but compared to pretty much every other line I have been on, this is not a problem in LA. The key here is not to skip maintenance, since this is what leads to noticeable deterioration.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1669  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2011, 5:18 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,282
pesto:
Quote:
His germ preoccupation is a bit troublesome and pulls his other comments into doubt.
I haven't read this posting but this isn't an unfounded fear at all-- and I say that as a staunch advocate of transit who rides the metro and bus daily in DC. I've seen plenty of people in our office who do nasty things in the restroom and then don't bother washing their hands afterwards. I don't want to get butt-hand from riding the metro after them. I always wash my hands after riding on metro-rail or the bus.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1670  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2011, 5:33 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
You probably wouldn't like India or Africa.

Last edited by pesto; Nov 2, 2011 at 4:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1671  
Old Posted Nov 8, 2011, 2:32 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,697
Quote:
Survey: Southern California Voters Want More Transit, Balk at More Highways

By Damien Newton
November 2, 2011

Even as Los Angeles embraces an expanded transit and bicycle program, the rest of Southern California is still pictured as a sprawling wasteland of highways and subdivisions. However, that’s not what the people that live in the Southland want according to a new survey released by Move L.A., the American Lung Association and the Natural Resources Defense Council. Instead, Southlanders want the kind of dense mixed use development and short commutes over McMansions and sprawlways.

The survey, completed by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz and Associates, shows that voters in the six county region served by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) overwhelmingly support expanding and investing in transit over investing in highways. Even when voters backed highway spending, there was more support for a “Fix It First” approach than funneling more money into mammoth road expansion projects.

“If Southern California voters were in charge of our transportation plans, the region would look very different,”Amanda Eaken, NRDC’s deputy director of sustainable communities, added. that “Voters understand what so many studies have told us: widening roads will not solve traffic congestion. Instead, designing communities that increase our mobility and freedom — helping us to get out of our cars — is what will ultimately solve the problem.”



...
http://la.streetsblog.org/2011/11/02...more-highways/
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1672  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2011, 4:43 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westsidelife View Post
Sounds pretty reasonable. Transit and repair of highways at the top; expansion of short segements or connections after that. New highways only where needed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1673  
Old Posted Nov 9, 2011, 5:42 PM
Ragnar Ragnar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
Sounds pretty reasonable. Transit and repair of highways at the top; expansion of short segements or connections after that. New highways only where needed.
The only major "missing connection" in L.A. that I can think of is the 710 segment from Pasadena down to I-10. Hopefully that will be completed as a tunnel someday.

The other one would be the 105 extension from the 605 to the 5, but I think that one is not even planned as far as I know, and I doubt the will (or funding) is there for that one.

I know the next major freeway expansion has (I believe) already started with the widening of I-5 from the OC line to the 605. That expansion is desperately needed. I know there are carpool lane projects already underway on the Golden State Freeway and the 405 (Carmaggedon anyone?).

But I think the age of "new highways/freeways" is over in the L.A. metro. Not only would it be financially difficult, politically it is impossible.

Light rail, heavy rail, and BRT is the future in the L.A. metro, which is a good thing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1674  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2011, 5:27 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
The only major "missing connection" in L.A. that I can think of is the 710 segment from Pasadena down to I-10. Hopefully that will be completed as a tunnel someday.

The other one would be the 105 extension from the 605 to the 5, but I think that one is not even planned as far as I know, and I doubt the will (or funding) is there for that one.

I know the next major freeway expansion has (I believe) already started with the widening of I-5 from the OC line to the 605. That expansion is desperately needed. I know there are carpool lane projects already underway on the Golden State Freeway and the 405 (Carmaggedon anyone?).

But I think the age of "new highways/freeways" is over in the L.A. metro. Not only would it be financially difficult, politically it is impossible.

Light rail, heavy rail, and BRT is the future in the L.A. metro, which is a good thing.
Generally agree; the 5 is beautiful and usually moving well in the OC and then you hit LA County and it's narrow, winding, barely moving, and surrounded by decay and graffiti. Not much of an add for relocating your business to LA.

The widening of the 405 south of the 10 has made a huge improvement; now it's time for the Valley to get some love (and, no, I don't think that traffic is or will be great or that we shouldn't have transit along the 5 or 405).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1675  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2011, 3:31 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,242
Villaraigosa wants to borrow future tax money to fix L.A. streets


Read More: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,2586923.story

Quote:
Looking to end his tenure at City Hall with a burst of public works projects, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has been quietly assembling a plan to borrow 27 years worth of tax revenue and spend it repairing nearly one-fourth of the city's streets. Villaraigosa, who leaves office in 2013, hopes to spend as much as $800 million on accelerated road repairs using proceeds from Measure R, a half-cent sales tax passed by county voters in 2008. The money could fix some 1,500 miles of streets within two to three years, mayoral aides said.

The initiative — known as L.A. Road Works —- would consume much of the city's allotment of Measure R funds, which run out in 2039 and are designed to pay for various transportation projects. In addition to funding rail and bus programs, Measure R provides every city in Los Angeles County monthly revenue based on population size. The city is expected to receive a total of more than $2 billion over three decades, money that can be used to repair streets, repave alleys and fix sidewalks, among other transportation improvements. The mayor is proposing to finance the fast-tracked street repairs with borrowed money that would be repaid, with interest, from future years' revenues.

As they made the rounds in City Hall in recent days, the mayor's allies said the proposal could create 1,000 jobs and address one of the public's top priorities: paving roads and eliminating potholes. But Councilman Bernard C. Parks, who heads the budget committee, voiced concern about using up so much money in such a short period. And he pointed to the borrowing costs, which would probably exceed $600 million. "If you are going to consciously use 27 years of funding in two years, not only are you obligated to tell people what you're using it for, you're also obligated to tell people what's not going to be available going forward," said Parks, who was briefed on the proposal last week.

.....



__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1676  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2011, 5:50 PM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,598
Im all for it as long as its a coordinated effort to replace the aging sewer system, underground the wires then rebuild the streets and sidewalks....in that order, which isn't always a given in LA
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1677  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2011, 6:09 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan View Post
Im all for it as long as its a coordinated effort to replace the aging sewer system, underground the wires then rebuild the streets and sidewalks....in that order, which isn't always a given in LA
The theory behind maintenance is to fund CURRENT needs, with the expenditures matched to current revenues. If you spend FUTURE revenues now, you don't have any money for repairs next year and the following 20 or 30.

This is the kind of spending that is very common in 3rd world countries and leads to their constant state of bankruptcy and disrepair. It would also lead to the rapid bankruptcy of any business, but would never happen since it is so obviously nonsensical (try building a 20 year plan showing slowly increasing maintenance costs plus interest and all the revenue spent the first year).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1678  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2011, 11:46 PM
mfastx mfastx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 257
I have only been to LA once (and admit to not traveling that many places within LA) but I found the limited amount of LA roadways to be in very good condition. At least, in comparison to Houston's travesty of a road system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1679  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2011, 7:14 AM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 1,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfastx View Post
I have only been to LA once (and admit to not traveling that many places within LA) but I found the limited amount of LA roadways to be in very good condition. At least, in comparison to Houston's travesty of a road system.
Really? That is very surprising. LA certainly is moving at a greater pace in mass transit but Houston's freeway system is almost unsurpassed in design.I realize that isn't much consolation on this particular forum, but the hub and spoke system in Houston is one of the best in America. There are certainly some beat up road ways, but it is certainly not worse than some of the older eastern metros.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1680  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2011, 9:19 PM
mfastx mfastx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasPlaya View Post
Really? That is very surprising. LA certainly is moving at a greater pace in mass transit but Houston's freeway system is almost unsurpassed in design.I realize that isn't much consolation on this particular forum, but the hub and spoke system in Houston is one of the best in America. There are certainly some beat up road ways, but it is certainly not worse than some of the older eastern metros.
I was talking about the surface roads in Houston, not the freeways. Yes, Houston's freeways are excellent, but our surface streets, especially in the inner city, are in poor condition.
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 9:23 PM.

     

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