LOS ANGELES | Transportation News & Discussion

[caligrad]

That moment when a transit thread turns into a Free trade/Political discussion.

Fix it Jesus. I tried to get us back on topic LOL

[Illithid Dude]

I generally refrain from making speculative posts due to the inherent futility of doing so but the old streetcar routes are one of my passions and I have, in my spare time, thought out what I feel like would be the best routes in for a true Los Angeles streetcar revival. All of my route proposals are contingent on the streetcar not being mixed with traffic and running in a dedicate right of way.

The new routes would center around the North Eastern neighborhoods, which are some of the oldest in the city and were built around streetcar lines. Being built around street car lines, they are centered around main streets that still carry remnants of the street car, often times being exceptionally wide and still containing the median the street car ran down. The most obvious line would be my Glendale / Echo Park line. Interestingly enough, the city of Glendale is proposing a similar line that would run from the Burbank Airport along Kenneth Road down Brand until where Brand turns in to Glendale Blvd. My idea would continue the streetcar down Glendale Blvd under Sunset Boulevard and past Echo Park. The line would then hit 2nd Street and continue down 2nd before traveling up either Broadway or Almeada towards N. Spring Street and ultimately terminating at the end of N. Spring Street in Lincoln Heights. This would bring rail to both major destinations (Glendale, Silver Lake / Echo Park) as well as transit dependent neighborhoods (Lincoln Heights).

My idea for a second line would share tracks with the first line until Broadway, where the line would turn up Broadway and proceed down Sunset Boulevard until Hollywood Boulevard. There, I am less sure. The line could either continue up Vermont towards Los Feliz or down Hollywood Boulevard. I am cautious about both a streetcar being redundant on Hollywood Boulevard, which already has a subway, and the distance the streetcar would travel. Streetcars work far better for traveling locally than they do traveling regionally. At a certain point, a streetcar would simply not be very useful.

This is also why I am cautious about my original streetcar idea - to run one down Venice Boulevard. Venice Boulevard had a streetcar before being a road, and as such was literally designed around a median running streetcar. That median is still there, and would be painfully easy to convert to a streetcar line that did not intersect whatsoever with traffic lanes and would not take away any traffic lanes. My issue with this is, once again, the length the streetcar would have to run. Would Venice not be better served by a light rail? I am also cautious about running a streetcar down San Vicente to Burton Way. An obvious line would run down Venice until San Vicente, travel north, and ultimately rown down Burton Way and terminate near downtown Beverly Hills. I only wonder if the ridership would be there for such a line. Unlike the Silver Lake / Glendale / Hollywood lines, the neighborhoods around San Vicente and Burton Way are almost purely residential and developed later in the 20th century, being far more automobile focused as a result. There's a chance that these neighborhoods could never be traversed in a local manner through design, even if they contained a streetcar.

Regardless, this is all total conjecture, and will ultimately lead to nothing. Alas, one can dream...

[numble]

Interesting items on the agendas for this month's committee meetings:

They are going to vote on approving the final Twenty-Eight by '28 project list:
Seems to be the same as the draft list.
https://metro.legistar.com/Legislati...3-0F3A3DFB8CD4

There will be oral reports on the status of the P3s and the Trump Infrastructure plan in the Executive Management and Audit Committee:
https://metro.legistar.com/View.ashx...3-0948C20259A6

They have been able to save a lot of time and money in the last year by not requiring contract modifications to be approved by the board, and they will recommend making this process permanent:
https://metro.legistar.com/Legislati...ch=&FullText=1

Based on the data collected during the one-year pilot period, cumulatively among the four mega transit construction projects, change items were elevated to the CEO for expeditious action needed rather than waiting for the process for Board approval. This delegation resulted in projects avoiding schedule delays of up to 6 months and their related cost impacts. Metro staff has estimated that the pilot program has cumulatively generated cost savings that ranges from $22.5M to $30M, measured by project schedule delay avoidance. These cumulative cost savings are approximated using the average cost to the Crenshaw/LAX, Regional Connector, Westside Purple Line Extension Section 1 and 2 Projects for schedule delays range from $3.3 to $5 million per month for a total of $6.6 to $10 million per action for a 2-month delay.

By example, in July 2017, Regional Connector Project was faced with an unexpected need to replace the three screw conveyers to the tunnel boring machine (TBM) as they had been damaged after striking unforeseen site conditions during the first of two mining drives. The tunnel boring activity is on the critical path for the entire project. The estimated cost for the task was in excess of $1 million. Replacement was accomplished during the ten-week preparation period prior to launching the second drive. The task of overseas procurement, followed by the placement and fitting of the new screws into the TBM assembly was accomplished during the scheduled reset and made possible by the CEO authorizing the procurement and associated installation labor under the pilot program. Without the pilot program, a substantial delay to schedule, at a cost of $5 million per month, would have been experienced owing to the lead-time connected with the development and approval of regular Board actions.

By another example, in late May 2017, Westside Purple Line Extension (PLE) Section 1 Project identified an opportunity to increase the project schedule float by advancing the excavation work at the Wilshire/La Brea Station, which is on the critical path of this project schedule. Those work activities estimated in excess of $10 million were elevated to the CEO for review and approval. For this specific change, a prompt turn-around was needed to take advantage of the opportunity to increase the project schedule float. Any prolonged process to implement this change would have resulted in a lost opportunity to gain back float. Without the pilot program, at least two-thirds of the float savings could not have been realized. With the pilot program in place, the change was elevated for the CEO approval and for the work to begin in the field. With the pilot program in place for this specific change, 130 days were added to the project schedule float.

Construction status report for January:
- Blue Line Improvements are under the name "The New Blue"
https://metro.legistar.com/View.ashx...E-2DB239AC4813

[NSMP]

I wrote a post about some medium and long term solutions to crowding at 7th and Metro.

https://redlinereader.wordpress.com/...7th-and-metro/

[bzcat]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

I generally refrain from making speculative posts due to the inherent futility of doing so but the old streetcar routes are one of my passions and I have, in my spare time, thought out what I feel like would be the best routes in for a true Los Angeles streetcar revival. All of my route proposals are contingent on the streetcar not being mixed with traffic and running in a dedicate right of way.

The new routes would center around the North Eastern neighborhoods, which are some of the oldest in the city and were built around streetcar lines. Being built around street car lines, they are centered around main streets that still carry remnants of the street car, often times being exceptionally wide and still containing the median the street car ran down. The most obvious line would be my Glendale / Echo Park line. Interestingly enough, the city of Glendale is proposing a similar line that would run from the Burbank Airport along Kenneth Road down Brand until where Brand turns in to Glendale Blvd. My idea would continue the streetcar down Glendale Blvd under Sunset Boulevard and past Echo Park. The line would then hit 2nd Street and continue down 2nd before traveling up either Broadway or Almeada towards N. Spring Street and ultimately terminating at the end of N. Spring Street in Lincoln Heights. This would bring rail to both major destinations (Glendale, Silver Lake / Echo Park) as well as transit dependent neighborhoods (Lincoln Heights).

My idea for a second line would share tracks with the first line until Broadway, where the line would turn up Broadway and proceed down Sunset Boulevard until Hollywood Boulevard. There, I am less sure. The line could either continue up Vermont towards Los Feliz or down Hollywood Boulevard. I am cautious about both a streetcar being redundant on Hollywood Boulevard, which already has a subway, and the distance the streetcar would travel. Streetcars work far better for traveling locally than they do traveling regionally. At a certain point, a streetcar would simply not be very useful.

This is also why I am cautious about my original streetcar idea - to run one down Venice Boulevard. Venice Boulevard had a streetcar before being a road, and as such was literally designed around a median running streetcar. That median is still there, and would be painfully easy to convert to a streetcar line that did not intersect whatsoever with traffic lanes and would not take away any traffic lanes. My issue with this is, once again, the length the streetcar would have to run. Would Venice not be better served by a light rail? I am also cautious about running a streetcar down San Vicente to Burton Way. An obvious line would run down Venice until San Vicente, travel north, and ultimately rown down Burton Way and terminate near downtown Beverly Hills. I only wonder if the ridership would be there for such a line. Unlike the Silver Lake / Glendale / Hollywood lines, the neighborhoods around San Vicente and Burton Way are almost purely residential and developed later in the 20th century, being far more automobile focused as a result. There's a chance that these neighborhoods could never be traversed in a local manner through design, even if they contained a streetcar.

Regardless, this is all total conjecture, and will ultimately lead to nothing. Alas, one can dream...

These corridors as proposed are too long to be effective modern streetcars. They are all better suited as light rail.

[numble]

Pasadena City Council recommends that 710-gap funds are to be used for (in addition to other things) a grade separation for the Gold Line at California Blvd.

http://www.pasadenanow.com/main/coun...ion-landscape/

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by bzcat

These corridors as proposed are too long to be effective modern streetcars. They are all better suited as light rail.

I disagree, a modern streetcar is basically just a long bus and these corridors already have bus lines.

Of course, streetcars can't drive around obstructions on the track, so you'd have to put in exclusive lanes and figure out a way to keep them clear.

[SoCalKid]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I disagree, a modern streetcar is basically just a long bus and these corridors already have bus lines.

Of course, streetcars can't drive around obstructions on the track, so you'd have to put in exclusive lanes and figure out a way to keep them clear.

This is semantics at this point, a streetcar with exclusive lanes is essentially light rail.

[NSMP]

Originally Posted by numble

Pasadena City Council recommends that 710-gap funds are to be used for (in addition to other things) a grade separation for the Gold Line at California Blvd.

http://www.pasadenanow.com/main/coun...ion-landscape/

Good idea. Would also have been good to see trenching South Pas station on there

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by bzcat

These corridors as proposed are too long to be effective modern streetcars. They are all better suited as light rail.

Tell that to Europe.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by NSMP

Good idea. Would also have been good to see trenching South Pas station on there

Glenarm (how is there not room for trenching?) and Del Mar as well, although Del Mar would be tricky.

[numble]

Metro wants to study new northern alignment options for the West Santa Ana Branch line:
Proposed options: http://metro.legistar.com/gateway.as...140fd7b4f0.pdf

https://metro.legistar.com/Legislati...316&FullText=1

[Quixote]

The "Downtown Core Transit - Option 1" alignment would be more interesting if it had a stop at 7th/Alameda.

[numble]

Originally Posted by Quixote

The "Downtown Core Transit - Option 1" alignment would be more interesting if it had a stop at 7th/Alameda.

Its there--the Arts District South station. They just did not use a large circle to show it is the station for all 4 line options.

Downtown Transit Core

This alignment option extends between the Downtown Station and the Washington Station along the Metro Blue Line ROW. The terminus location within the Pershing Square, 7th Street/Metro and Regional Connector area will be studied. This alignment option could provide two to three potential stations between Washington Station and the terminus depending on the alignment to be determined. This alignment option was developed based upon scoping comments and ongoing technical analysis.

An important point is that its looking like any alignment involving Little Tokyo will probably not be adopted:

Approximately 400 comments were submitted by Little Tokyo stakeholders. Comments received expressed strong opposition to some or all of the northern alignment options and were particularly opposed to an elevated alignment along Alameda Street with concerns about the visual impacts. Comments from the Little Tokyo community also relayed a history of ongoing construction impacts experienced by the community related to the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension and the Regional Connector projects, and concern with the prospect of future construction impacts brought on by a WSAB alignment through their community with an identified potential future station at Alameda Street, west of 1st Street.

Seems some rail stakeholders do not want the service to take up space at Union Station:

Metro also received scoping letters from several agencies. In their scoping letters, Metrolink, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and High Speed Rail (HSR) expressed concerns regarding the northern alignment options. Specifically, their comments focused on encouraging Metro to seek alternatives that do not limit the potential for additional regional railroad capacity at LAUS.

[Quixote]

^ That's great!

I'm all in favor of the DTC-1 option. DT needs a dense subway station network à la Midtown Manhattan, the Chicago Loop, and core DC. This, along with the Regional Connector, could be the start of that. Do you think losing the US connection would be a big deal?

[NSMP]

There’s nothing at Union Station. Plus, going west provides the ability to service Santa Monica Bl or Glendale in future rather than San Fernando Road.

[Quixote]

There needs to be a connection with other rail lines, otherwise it's a big missed opportunity. Any ideas for where to place the terminus?

[NSMP]

Originally Posted by Quixote

There needs to be a connection with other rail lines, otherwise it's a big missed opportunity. Any ideas for where to place the terminus?

Yeah, I actually discussed it a bit in my last Red Line Reader post. Take Pacific and stop at:
6th/Santa Fe (transfer to Red/Purple)
4th/Alameda
4th/Hill (transfer to Red/Purple)
Terminus at 4th/Flower (transfer to infill Blue/Expo station)

And then extend via Beverly or Glendale

[Quixote]

^ I think 4th/Flower is a good choice. I know that original plans for the Regional Connector called for a station at 5th/Flower, but 4th/Flower is equidistant between 7SMC and 2nd/Hope.

[Illithid Dude]

I personally still think that the best option is going to Union Square from the Arts District. A separate subway station could always be built that connects to the Little Tokyo arts district station via an underground concourse. Of course, a more forward thinking transportation agency would have known that the Arts District station would be an interchange and designed it as such to minimize potential future impacts...