Los Angeles MTA

[Kenny]

Originally Posted by State of the Union

Maybe I just don't have the eye for architecture, but I've never had an issue with any of LA's Metro Rail Stations.

I don't know how this Hawthorne guy can argue against stations like Hollywood/Vine or Mariachi Plaza. I think the Expo Designs are original and look great, certainly better than other plain looking LRT/HRT systems I've seen around the country.

Seattle's Central Light Rail stations are pretty plain looking.

Also, arguing maintainence costs of these stations when LA Metro is one of few largest agencies that still have a balance budget, yet still having the lowest fares in the country, is moot. More than I can say for NYC's MTA or Boston's MBTA, which are flat broke.

Um, you nailed it.

[Elsongs]

Originally Posted by klamedia

I think we're nearing the potential tipping point in LA with the robust growth of Downtown and the revitalization of inner core neighborhoods like Koreatown, Silver Lake and East Hollywood where residents may forego the auto because of the transit rich nature of the area.

With more bikes on the road taking advantage of streets that have lanes and even those that do not e.g. Fountain more and more people will forego the auto in my assumption, for short trips. Right in the Sunset Junction area of Silver Lake a Yummy grocery is opening with no addt'l parking, a small footprint store that encourages walking and their now famous delivery service to local dwellers. It is imperative that the MTA provides transit service that we've spent billions on that is a TRUE upgrade from what we've had in the past, in its entirety.

We can't have a train where the first 2 miles are slow and the last 6 miles are fast. That = the train is slow. I'd rather suspend all build out projects and spend the money on upgrading the weak points in the system that hurt the system overall like this portion of Expo and problematic areas on the Blue Line.

Perhaps when the Blue Line was the first LRT in the county these slow sections could be forgiven. Even by the time the Gold Line came on board we may have begrudgingly tolerated the slowed portion at Marmion Way a) it is very short b) the line overall is pretty much grade separated or on its exclusive ROW therefore unhindered. But after 22 years of operating and building trains the MTA should know better not to run a train at grade without definite signal preemption. Getting the public excited about Expo and then dashing that excitement with stop lights and allowing cars with single passengers turn left before the train proceeds will assure that we will be stuck with a very expensive yet neutered system. This is unacceptable!

I don't think you read a word of what I said. I don't know how long you've been here but I've ridden the Metro Rail since July 14, 1990. I actually have historical perspective of the system that you don't seem to have. I know things get tweaked and streamlined eventually. Part of the Expo Line's problem is that it's the first time an LRT line has had to have a split track routing. Until now each LRT line pretty much ran on its own, back and forth. Now Blue/Expo creates a new operational paradigm for Metro. The kinks are still apparent right now as delays in the line are almost always attributed to the signaling/switching configuration.

The speed of the line will no doubt be remedied when Phase 2 opens. As the line stands right now, trains have to dwell at La Cienega for a long time, and are gradually going to deadhead to Culver City as part of the testing program. By the time it opens to Santa Monica, it would have to run like clockwork.

Again, the Blue and Gold Lines used to be much slower when they first opened. You might not be aware of that. The same will happen to the Expo Line.

[Elsongs]

Originally Posted by State of the Union

Maybe I just don't have the eye for architecture, but I've never had an issue with any of LA's Metro Rail Stations.

I don't know how this Hawthorne guy can argue against stations like Hollywood/Vine or Mariachi Plaza. I think the Expo Designs are original and look great, certainly better than other plain looking LRT/HRT systems I've seen around the country.

Seattle's Central Light Rail stations are pretty plain looking.

Also, arguing maintainence costs of these stations when LA Metro is one of few largest agencies that still have a balance budget, yet still having the lowest fares in the country, is moot. More than I can say for NYC's MTA or Boston's MBTA, which are flat broke.

I don't seem to have a problem with the design of the Expo Line stations. I actually think they look better than the original Pasadena Gold Line stations.

I do see where the problem originates and it is this: There is no consistent design for Metro's light rail stations. A lot of it had to do with when the lines were planned. The Blue and Green lines were planned in the 1980s, with an '80s eye of what future aesthetics would look like.

Same with the Gold Line, designed in the 1990s, but opened in the 2000s. The Expo Line was originally envisioned as a branch of the Blue Line, then was shelved, then brought back as a full project from DTLA to Santa Monica. At that point, it was already the 21st century, and a new aesthetic eye dictates design.

Same goes for the new Red Line subway station canopies, designed to protect the escalators from the elements. The canopy designs are unabashedly modern, but they would have to go over station entrances that were designed in the 1980s.

It's obviously too late to go back and change things, but cities like Washington DC have a standard design for both their above-ground and underground stations. Although all of that is more feasible when most of the system was built/designed in the same era.

[klamedia]

Originally Posted by Elsongs

I don't think you read a word of what I said. I don't know how long you've been here but I've ridden the Metro Rail since July 14, 1990. I actually have historical perspective of the system that you don't seem to have. I know things get tweaked and streamlined eventually. Part of the Expo Line's problem is that it's the first time an LRT line has had to have a split track routing. Until now each LRT line pretty much ran on its own, back and forth. Now Blue/Expo creates a new operational paradigm for Metro. The kinks are still apparent right now as delays in the line are almost always attributed to the signaling/switching configuration.

The speed of the line will no doubt be remedied when Phase 2 opens. As the line stands right now, trains have to dwell at La Cienega for a long time, and are gradually going to deadhead to Culver City as part of the testing program. By the time it opens to Santa Monica, it would have to run like clockwork.

Again, the Blue and Gold Lines used to be much slower when they first opened. You might not be aware of that. The same will happen to the Expo Line.

Aside from your dramatic response and dating yourself back to a time when most of Los Angeles was still equestrian, I am aware that the Gold Line has sped up over the years. I can only hope that this will be the case with Expo, sooner rather than later.

[Elsongs]

Each Metro Rail (and Metro Liner) station has a 12' high illuminated wayfinding pylon that bears the Metro logo, a wedge design that bears the color of the transit line and the station name on it.

However, for multi-line stations, such as 7th Street/Metro Center, Union Station, etc. there are no such pylons that reflect that, mainly because of the colored wedge. Drives me nuts!

I've wondered about this, so I made up a "fan-fiction" concept pylon design: The colored wedge would be neutral black, and it would have illuminated colored circles bearing the lines that station serves. Furthermore, the vertical arrangement of the circles reflects their position in the station -- i.e. the Green Line is located above the Blue Line at the Willowbrook (Imperial/Wilmington/Rosa Parks) station.

Here's a mock-up for 7th Street Metro Center (the setting doesn't match its actual location, I'm aware of that, I just used an existing picture of the Expo Park/USC Expo Line station as a model).

You think Metro should do something like this? Lemme know what you think.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Agreed. That looks great. the 7th street metro doesnt have any signs at its Hope street entrance and could use a pylon on Fig as well.

[slipperydog]

Originally Posted by Elsongs

This is the way it's done in NYC and it's very intuitive.

[klamedia]

Just remove the grass around the base and I'll be ok with it.

[dachacon]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

Agreed. That looks great. the 7th street metro doesnt have any signs at its Hope street entrance and could use a pylon on Fig as well.

Pylon would require valuable sidewalk space. so just putting a circle with the corresponding colors on the sides of the building entrances works.

[Elsongs]

Originally Posted by dachacon

Pylon would require valuable sidewalk space. so just putting a circle with the corresponding colors on the sides of the building entrances works.

There used to be one at Fig & 7th, and also at Hope & 7th...you can still see the foundation. But they were mysteriously removed.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by dachacon

Pylon would require valuable sidewalk space. so just putting a circle with the corresponding colors on the sides of the building entrances works.

True, a Blade sign would be much better, but the point is that we need something there

[112597Jorge]

First Plans Revealed For Rail From Union Station to Santa Ana

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

10 images



Did you know there is a plan to develop the West Santa Ana Branch of the old Pacific Electric corridor into a public transit line with a projected ridership of 80,000 passengers a day? The Downey Beat reports that a planning effort, led by the Southern California Association of Governments, has produced an Initial Executive Summary for a Alternatives Analysis Report (pdf) for the long-stewing plans (they've been floating around since 2002). The Executive Summary lays out a pretty large variety of options--everything from a no-build alternative to streetcars, light rail, and Maglev train (sorry, no gondolas). The report also analyzes differences in cost and ridership among several alternative routes along what is currently called the Orange Line (yes, that name is already taken)--the most robust possibilities for the line would extend along the Pacific Electric right of way (PEROW) between Union Station and Santa Ana. The Executive Summary makes a case that the PEROW has the elements necessary for a rail line: the projected ridership of the line exceeds the capacity for a Bus Rapid Transit System by two or two and a half times, with the light rail alternative achieving the highest ridership. The projected ridership of the light rail line would be more than 80,000--that's more than the 64,000 daily riders expected to use the Expo Line when it reaches Santa Monica.

la.curbed.com

[Elsongs]

If they envision a ridership of some 80,000+ then they might as well make this heavy rail. I'd like to see this built as an extension of the Red or Purple Lines heading southeast on an all-elevated/at-grade/below grade alignment, a la BART in the Bay Area suburbs. There would be zero or very little tunneling involved.

[dachacon]

Take a guess who is coming out against it? Orange County has a perfect opportunity to begin there own transit system and are coming out swinging against it.

[klamedia]

Fuck'em then. Stop it at the LA border. Before this I would think that more attention would be given to the original plan for heavy rail along Whittier Blvd into East LA.

[croyboy]

they'll probly stop it and then NOT build their own just to screw everyone

[pesto]

Kind of odd to compare riderhsip on a 35 mile segment with that on a 12 mile one (Expo). On a per mile basis, doesnt sound all that busy.

[slipperydog]

Well, it's official...BHUSD sues Metro over the Westside Subway

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...er-school.html

[pesto]

Let's hope for a quick resolution.

[klamedia]

The only resolution is to build the subway. It's not like BH's has valid concerns.