daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old July 17th, 2012, 04:44 PM   #941
Swede
forumer #29
 
Swede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: sol.III.eu.se.08
Posts: 4,215
Likes (Received): 1663

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woonsocket54 View Post
San Fernando Valley commuters on the Expo Line

http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_210...-new-expo-line
This is what happends as you build a network, people find routes the planners didn't think of. Which is why good transfer-stations are important, as are new crossing lines once enough lines go to the central hub.
__________________
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
Swede no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 25th, 2012, 11:56 PM   #942
LAmarODom420
Lamarvelous
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 85
Likes (Received): 4

http://la.streetsblog.org/wp-content/pdf/MeasureRProgressionMaps20120713.pdf


Measure R build outs by decade. As you will see, we need to pass Measure R+ to borrow against future tax revenue to accelerate construction or we will wait a very long time for the Purple Line Westside Extension and Sepulveda Pass Line.
LAmarODom420 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 27th, 2012, 11:23 PM   #943
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,688
Likes (Received): 17044



__________________
My FLICKR Page < 54,100+ Photos of Urban Renewal , Infrastructure , Food and Nature in the Northeastern US
Visit the Reorganized New York City Section
My Photography Website
Visit the New Jersey Section
Nexis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 29th, 2012, 02:04 AM   #944
webeagle12
Registered User
 
webeagle12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Albany
Posts: 1,744
Likes (Received): 450

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainrover View Post
I see what you did there
webeagle12 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2012, 03:36 AM   #945
KingNick
Make Wu'bar Great Again
 
KingNick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 6,039
Likes (Received): 8718

SSC members on that pic?

KingNick no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 2nd, 2012, 08:13 PM   #946
nandert
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 8
Likes (Received): 0

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/com...y-potter/2710/
Just saw this article - specifically about London, but could apply to subway trains anywhere. How great would this be on the red and purple lines? The novelty of it could help bring in some first-time transit riders, I'm sure...
nandert no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 3rd, 2012, 02:12 AM   #947
LosAngelesSportsFan
Moderator
 
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,968
Likes (Received): 860

Very cool. i think thats a great idea
LosAngelesSportsFan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 3rd, 2012, 10:26 PM   #948
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

__________________
.
hee hee
.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 7th, 2012, 03:06 AM   #949
Darloeye
Registered User
 
Darloeye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: County Durham, England
Posts: 1,823
Likes (Received): 84

Yeah that would be good. I'll post it on the Underground thread.
Darloeye no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2012, 02:23 AM   #950
nandert
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 8
Likes (Received): 0

http://wehonews.com/z/wehonews/archi...articleID=7119
Quote:
Mag-lev cars for WeHo?
8/8/2012
How would you like to scoot across West Hollywood in under two minutes in an enclosed mag-lev car, bypassing traffic congestion while utilizing the greenest transportation tech available?
That was the question posed when Nick Garzilli, Sustainable Transportation Executive for Evacuated Tube Transportation Technologies (ET3), presented the West Hollywood City Council Monday with an out of this world, futuristic transportation plan that would act as a pilot project demonstrating his company’s product.
He claims that the ET3 system “is faster than jets, yet can accomplish 50 times more transportation per kilowatt hour than electric cars or trains at 1/10th the cost.”
Mr. Garzilli, a West Hollywood resident, said that “ET3's vision is to put car sized capsules accelerated by electric power coast on maglev in an automated tube network without air friction that would zip people across West Hollywood in under two minutes.
“We want to build this… personal rapid transit j-pod with solar panels on top that go 30-40 miles per hour, as a starter project in the City of West Hollywood,” he said.
He encouraged the council to take his company’s plan under consideration, “If you want to be forward thinking, let’s begin right here,” he said.
“We want to build this with private funds; we want to share the revenues with the rights of way holders…”
Adding that the system would open the door to stopping the subsidizing of inefficient modes of transportation, “we could do it all on a solar budget.”
He asked for a letter of interest to allow his firm to develop a plan for the city that would allow ET3 to “connect to the Red Line and, when the subway is eventually built down there on Wilshire… to that.”
He promised that, if the city were to provide permission and right of way, “we could build it fast and build it inside of a year.”
So what do you think, WeHo?
Forward into the future with a pilot mag-lev or sit still with present day traffic?
Well, there's an idea for the pink line...

Last edited by nandert; August 9th, 2012 at 02:33 AM.
nandert no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 10th, 2012, 11:04 AM   #951
philip
The Picture Guy
 
philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 568
Likes (Received): 71

Quote:
Originally Posted by nandert View Post
http://wehonews.com/z/wehonews/archi...articleID=7119


Well, there's an idea for the pink line...
__________________
I am the Picture Guy - A picture is worth a thousand words.
philip no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 9th, 2012, 11:40 PM   #952
geometarkv
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 553
Likes (Received): 588

I dont know if this video was posted before but i just found it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFvnhM2A2Ok
geometarkv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 11th, 2012, 05:40 AM   #953
LAmarODom420
Lamarvelous
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 85
Likes (Received): 4

Los Angeles Asks Its Voters to Extend Transit Tax Far Into the Future


http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2...to-the-future/

» Lacking the federal support to advance its transportation projects forward as quickly as the leadership — and perhaps the public — desires, L.A. County residents will vote on whether to extend a 1/2-cent sales tax for thirty more years.

Residents of Los Angeles may already pay more in sales taxes for the upkeep and expansion of their transportation system than people in any other county in the U.S. Referenda have been approved by voters in 1980, 1990, and 2008, each of which distributes a half-cent tax on every dollar in sales to the county’s transportation system, Metro. Of the total $1.8 billion per year in revenues,* about 40% are spent on expansions to the transit system, with the rest distributed to maintenance and operations of the county’s roads and transit systems.

This very public endorsement of the need to invest in transportation (Measure R, passed in 2008, required a 2/3-vote to be approved, pursuant to California law) has allowed for the planning of the nation’s most extensive rail and fixed-guideway bus expansion program. Earlier this year, the first segment of the Expo Line opened to Culver City; two other light rail expansions are under construction, and several other bus and rail lines are funded. Most importantly, a subway rail extension running under Wilshire Boulevard through West the Westside of L.A., to Westwood and U.C.L.A., is practically ready to begin construction.

But Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who has been the staunchest political advocate of improved transit in L.A., has been clear that the program is not advancing quickly enough. Because of the lack of strong federal support, the full extent of the Westside Subway will not be completed until 2036; important improvements for other parts of the county will not be done until later. That’s more than thirty more years with little significant alternative to the traffic-clogged arteries so infamous in the city. Thus the county approved, the state legislature accepted, and the governor signed late last month the bill offering to the public in the form of a referendum Measure J, which will extend the Measure R tax 30 years past its original expiration date, which was supposed to be 2039.

What is to be voted on is not a new tax. Rather, if approved on November 6, it will continue assessing the 1/2-cent sales tax between 2039 and 2069. The outcome may well determine the degree to which L.A. is able to produce a truly appealing alternative to automobile travel within a reasonable amount of time.

Why pass a tax extension now, when the revenues will not begin to be collected for another 27 years? To build more quickly.

Effectively, the mayor wants to be able to “bond against” future revenues — in other words, to take out loans from the investment market that will not be paid back until beginning in 2039, in order to pay for transportation projects now. The tax extension does not appear likely to add to the list of transit projects that will be completed — it will just allow them to be completed more quickly.

Though the measure is practically sure to win a simple majority of voters, whether it will win a two-thirds majority remains to be seen. Measure R passed with only 67.2% of the vote, just enough to succeed, and that proposal actually provided funds for new projects. This referendum, on the other hand, states that it will “accelerat[e] construction of light rail/subway/airport connections within five years not twenty,” as well as improve safety on roads and keep senior, student, and disabled fares low. Will that be enough to convince voters on this matter, especially when certain local officials make the reasonable point that the proposal would “bind our hands until 2069“?

By 2040, will the county’s citizens be content with the transit system they have constructed? If so, perhaps they will be happy to continue paying taxes. If not, will they assent to essentially continue to pay off the debt on an unwanted infrastructure for another thirty years?

The referendum would extend the tax “for another 30 years or until voters decide to end it.” What if disenchanted voters decide to cut off the tax midway through its life? The county will have to find other funds to pay back the loans that were supposed to be financed through the tax revenues (and which have the county’s credit behind them), cutting down on the county’s ability to fund other priorities or requiring a separate tax increase. These uncertainties may limit investor interest in buying the county’s revenue bonds or increase the interest the county is forced to pay to take out those loans.

Moreover, the measure does not specifically guarantee that the projects promised back in 2008 will actually be delivered. Though L.A. has moved forward on a number of its recent expansion projects relatively on time and on budget, several American cities have promised far too much. Miami’s transportation referendum, passed in 2002 and supposed to fund dozens of miles of rail expansions, has produced just 2.4 miles, a major embarrassment and an affront to the voters’ original intent. The referenda results will say a lot about the public perception of Metro’s ability to produce what it has promised.

In other words, it is hardly obvious that a large majority of L.A. voters will agree to Measure J’s passage. Significant public information campaigns will be required if it is to be approved.

Yet the truth is that if L.A. wants an expanded transportation network now, rather than 30 years in the future, it has few options. It can adopt this approach, which has several demerits, as shown above. It could increase its taxes once again, but the sales tax burden is already quite high. Or it could rely on low-interest federal loans to advance projects more quickly. The latter was the solution Mayor Villaraigosa initially proposed in 2010 as “30/10″ — 30 years of projects in 10 years. His proposal, which he renamed “America Fast Forward,” was politically popular enough to make it in a certain form (through an expansion of TIFIA to $1 billion) into the federal transportation bill earlier this summer, but that aid will not be adequate to fund all the projects L.A. wants — even if the U.S. DOT prioritizes the county over the rest of the country.

L.A.’s voters, then, have a choice: Take a risk by assuming that people of the future will want the investments being made today and therefore be happy to pay for them, or slow down the rate of transit expansion tremendously.

* Thanks to the recession, revenues per referendum have declined significantly since the peak in 2007, when each tax produced more than $686 million, compared to around $602 million in 2011.
LAmarODom420 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 12:36 AM   #954
LAmarODom420
Lamarvelous
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 85
Likes (Received): 4

Sepulveda Pass Corridor Systems Planning Study Update
September 2012

http://www.metro.net/board/Items/201...orWESItem5.pdf

Metro has added rail from Sylmar to LAX as an option (Concept 5). Funding for Alternatives Analysis Study should be issued this month.



Congrats to the Transit Coalition for its advocacy. We need to keep up the good work. Like the Sepulveda Pass Subway page:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Sepul...42362322532852
LAmarODom420 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 03:10 AM   #955
LosAngelesSportsFan
Moderator
 
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,968
Likes (Received): 860

Other than the purple line and the Crenshaw north (previously pink line) this is the most important of all rail lines in LA. once we have that, our rail system will take a HUGE step forward.

i sincerely hope the HRT with a tunnel between the valley and west LA is chosen. that 20 minute trip will be a game changer for LA transit.
LosAngelesSportsFan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 25th, 2012, 03:50 AM   #956
k.k.jetcar
Registered User
 
k.k.jetcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sapporo
Posts: 1,812
Likes (Received): 452

28 miles? Anywhere else in the world, that would be heavy rail territory, with 6 car trains, at least. If you follow world best practices, you would make it a RER/S-Bahn/Tokyo Metro type arrangement, with interchange/runthrough on Metrolink tracks in the Valley. But I won't keep my hopes up.
k.k.jetcar no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 30th, 2012, 04:47 PM   #957
Neb81
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 201
Likes (Received): 71

Quote:
Originally Posted by k.k.jetcar View Post
28 miles? Anywhere else in the world, that would be heavy rail territory, with 6 car trains, at least. If you follow world best practices, you would make it a RER/S-Bahn/Tokyo Metro type arrangement, with interchange/runthrough on Metrolink tracks in the Valley. But I won't keep my hopes up.
I've noticed this with the LA system. Given the distances and population figures involved, a lot of the lines constructed as trams (I'd hesitate to use the term LRT, since in most cases they are not fully seperated from road traffic) really would be MRT or RER systems. I'm guessing it's an attempt to reduce costs, given the lack of federal supported mentioned in LAmarODom's post. Nonetheless, the very long headways on most lines outside of rush hour (15mins mid-day and 20min evenings) makes the system undeireable to may potential users, restricting ridership and meaning a lot of the potential of the infrastructure developed - and the huge capital costs sunk into it - is wasted due to a lack of will to make the relatively small subsidies neccessary to ensure decent frequency. Trams have their place, but not on the main trunk lines of a transit system that serves a metropolitan region of 12+ million.

I think it is great that the county government is trying to take the bull by the horns and undo decades of damage with the freeway culture in LA, but I think the way they are going about it is a bit blinkered. They really should have stopped to take a better look at how other cities have dealt with these issues, paticularly cities like Madrid, which has undergone a huge metro revival abou the same time as LA got serious about Metro, and after similar experiments with freeway fever.
Neb81 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 30th, 2012, 09:30 PM   #958
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,980
Likes (Received): 836



I think in the case of LA, this was the only way to go. If the LRT/tram works, becomes popular and becomes overcrowded, that will be a clear signal even to nay-sayers that it should be upgraded.
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 1st, 2012, 05:51 AM   #959
Tom 958
Registered User
 
Tom 958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: near Atlanta
Posts: 786
Likes (Received): 163

Quote:
Originally Posted by Silly_Walks View Post


I think in the case of LA, this was the only way to go. If the LRT/tram works, becomes popular and becomes overcrowded, that will be a clear signal even to nay-sayers that it should be upgraded.
Upgraded? How, pray tell, without disrupting service?
Tom 958 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 1st, 2012, 01:42 PM   #960
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,980
Likes (Received): 836

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom 958 View Post
Upgraded? How, pray tell, without disrupting service?
I never said without disrupting service... that's the disadvantage with not going for full metro straight away.
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
los angeles

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium