HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #6861  
Old Posted Yesterday, 1:07 AM
Easy's Avatar
Easy Easy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,576
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
The light rail mode allows transit agencies to pick up "easy wins". They can build 5X as much surface light rail as heavy rail subway but rarely are able to create a transformative project. The United States is now peppered with dozens of somewhat-useful light rail lines but has few TOD's to show for it.
LA has certainly had some easy wins with light rail but the K wasn't one of them. Three underground stations plus a massive $900 million infill station push the final cost to about $375 million per mile.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6862  
Old Posted Yesterday, 2:09 AM
hughfb3 hughfb3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy View Post
LA has certainly had some easy wins with light rail but the K wasn't one of them. Three underground stations plus a massive $900 million infill station push the final cost to about $375 million per mile.
The K line and the Eastside E, both current East LA and the future phases into Whittier and Hollywood are way too grade separated to utilize the benefits of Light Rail... The Blue Line, Expo, and Gold line were pretty much easy targets for LRT as they had an abandoned railroad right of way to work with. The green line could have been any technology as LRT is a moot point on a completely freeway grade separated line with a fully elevated west end.

So happy for the new option the Sepulveda pass could bring us with an elevated rail technology, so LA can finally choose if we want at grade localized (LRT), below grade rapid (HRT) or elevated high frequency (SKYtrain) on future brand new lines.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6863  
Old Posted Yesterday, 2:44 AM
Illithid Dude's Avatar
Illithid Dude Illithid Dude is offline
Paramoderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Santa Monica / New York City
Posts: 3,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDude View Post
So when will the Purple Line extend to Lincoln in Santa Monica?
Who knows, but I know Metro, or maybe the Westside Coalition just earmarked 20 million to further study the route. I'm sure momentum for the extension will pick up when the current Purple Line construction wraps up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6864  
Old Posted Yesterday, 5:17 AM
jmecklenborg jmecklenborg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy View Post
LA has certainly had some easy wins with light rail but the K wasn't one of them. Three underground stations plus a massive $900 million infill station push the final cost to about $375 million per mile.
The Crenshaw line partly used an abandoned railroad right-of-way. That's how they ended up with mediocre-at-best station locations like this:


A "downtown" station of any kind needs to be solidly in the downtown, not on the edge of it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6865  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:50 PM
Swede's Avatar
Swede Swede is offline
YIMBY co-founder
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sol.III.eu.se.08
Posts: 6,758
And am I seeing this right:
The station has no exist to the NW side of the station? Only to the 5 lane road to the SE?

Some seriously bad planning if you want people to actually use the station.
__________________
Forumers met so far:
Huopa, Nightsky, Jo, wolkenkrabber, ThisSideofSteinway, jacksom, New Jack City, LeCom, Ellatur, Jan, Dennis, Ace, Bardamu, AtlanticaC5, Ringil, Dysfunctional, stacey, karakhal, ch1le, Hviid, staff, kjetilab, Þróndeimr, queetz, FREKI, sander, Blue Viking, nomels, Mantas, ristov, Rafal_T, khaan, Chilenofuturista, Jonte Myra, safta20, AW, Pas, Jarmo K, IceCheese, Sideshow_Bob, sk, Ingenioren, Ayreonaut, Silver Creations, Hasse78, Svartmetall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6866  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:02 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,356
^I suspect the thinking is the immediate area around the station will eventually be totally rebuilt into TOD.
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6867  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:29 PM
craigs's Avatar
craigs craigs is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
^I suspect the thinking is the immediate area around the station will eventually be totally rebuilt into TOD.
I think you're right. Once that station is directly connected to LAX, adjacent land values will likely rise enough to justify the redevelopment of parcels such as the directly adjacent Don Lee Farms food processing plant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6868  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:43 PM
craigs's Avatar
craigs craigs is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,798
Double post
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6869  
Old Posted Today, 10:25 AM
LineDrive LineDrive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmecklenborg View Post
The light rail mode allows transit agencies to pick up "easy wins". They can build 5X as much surface light rail as heavy rail subway but rarely are able to create a transformative project. The United States is now peppered with dozens of somewhat-useful light rail lines but has few TOD's to show for it.
There are some parts of the LA region where a Light Rail line isn’t so bad as long as it’s done CORRECTLY. But it is not done correctly. Not half ass. Correctly means easy and quick transfers. Fully grade separated (No traffic crossings etc), closer to Heavy Rail frequency etc…

Further expanding on that - the transfer between E line and K line is horrific from what I’ve read. It’s supposed to be seamless - you go upstairs or downstairs and jump aboard the other line. Not supposed to be a go upstairs, out of the gates, cross the street, enter into fare gates again so on and so forth type of thing.

The lack of grade separation in some areas - like the A/E lines on Washington for instance - is second grade and a detriment to the overall system.

Also the planning for the ESFV line - stations every block it seems like are going to make the thing crawl - and on a line that goes to nowhere …it seems to be a waste.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6870  
Old Posted Today, 11:04 AM
hughfb3 hughfb3 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by LineDrive View Post
There are some parts of the LA region where a Light Rail line isn’t so bad as long as it’s done CORRECTLY. But it is not done correctly. Not half ass. Correctly means easy and quick transfers. Fully grade separated (No traffic crossings etc), closer to Heavy Rail frequency etc…
The Blue line was designed very well as a light rail, which is why it was built quickly, within budget and has been the top performing single line in the country. San Diego pioneered the first modern LRT system which was built primarily at grade, relating with auto traffic when necessary and being separate only when a right of way was available. Its success catalyzed the building spree of LRT across the country. Before the 1980’s debut of the San Diego trolley, every system being built in the country was a fully grade separated heavy rail. The strength and allure of light rail is in its design’s flexibility to lower cost… overhead catenary power supply put out of reach from people/cars, and heavier auto collision resistant trains allows them the ability to interact with cars and surface elements while protecting passengers. These and other things contribute to LRT having a top speed of 55-60 mph.

Heavy rail has a higher top speed of 70-80 mph and quicker acceleration attributed to efficiencies like the trains being lighter than “light rail” because they don’t need to be auto crash rated and are usually designed with 3rd rail power which must be protected from the public. It’s interesting how we in the States call Light Rail “Light Rail” when the trains are many times heavier per square foot than a “Heavy Rail” for safety reasons

What you describe above as a completely grade separated system could be done with our higher speed/higher capacity heavy rail trains if it’s on its own right of way… even if it’s on the surface. Over grade separating Light rail defeats its inherent benefits and we end up with a costlier system that is both slower and lower capacity when it could have been heavy rail from the get go if it was going to be fully grade separated

Last edited by hughfb3; Today at 7:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6871  
Old Posted Today, 2:11 PM
citywatch citywatch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 6,455
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:31 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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