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 August 24th, 2015, 11:46 PM   #1821
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,688
Likes (Received): 17043

Why does the Purple line extension not go to Downtown Santa Monica?
__________________
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

Sponsored Links
Old August 24th, 2015, 11:52 PM   #1822
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,350
Likes (Received): 3597

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis View Post
Why does the Purple line extension not go to Downtown Santa Monica?
Currently it's just the lack of funding; there's plenty of support for it and it's in Metro's long range plan. If SR2 passes next year, there's a good chance that it will get added to the current planned phases.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 24th, 2015, 11:59 PM   #1823
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,688
Likes (Received): 17043

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
Currently it's just the lack of funding; there's plenty of support for it and it's in Metro's long range plan. If SR2 passes next year, there's a good chance that it will get added to the current planned phases.
No , I meant the routing...wouldn't it be better to send it to Downtown Santa Monica instead of just north of it?
__________________
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 August 25th, 2015, 12:06 AM   #1824
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,350
Likes (Received): 3597

Ohhhh. Yeah, I think it's just a matter of cost and complexity. Constructing a line under a large boulevard is relatively simple and inexpensive, compared to routing "off-grid." The drama with BHHS has shown what you can get yourself into if you tunnel under occupied property. Then there's the question of crossing the 10 freeway, which I can only assume would be particularly complex if you wanted to run the Purple Line down, say, Lincoln or Main.

I think Metro's reasoning is that the Big Blue Bus can easily ferry "first mile/last mile" riders to Downtown SM from both the Expo (4th and Colorado) and the Purple Line (3rd and Wilshire) at a fraction of the cost of routing a subway there. There's certainly the possibility that those alternatives could be explored though once funding is in place and the final leg of the extension is a sure thing.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2015, 12:48 AM   #1825
LosAngelesSportsFan
Moderator
 
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,968
Likes (Received): 860

Marshall, your idea for a new subway line is ideal. If only i had 5 billion to donate to the MTA.
__________________

MarshallKnight, CNB30, Kenni liked this post
LosAngelesSportsFan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2015, 07:27 AM   #1826
2Easy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Inglewood, CA
Posts: 70
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis View Post
Pink Line was proposed by a candidate running for city council it was never a serious proposal and it was Heavy Rail along with the planned Purple line extension. The various Streetcar proposals in the LA metro will use low floor LRVs....but the Heavier used lines under Metro use high level.

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2013/0...2ea11727010bc0
Well that's not completely accurate. I guess he did revive some version of the Pink line but the original was several years earlier. Before the first Measure R vote so around 2006 or 2007 maybe. By Dan somebody. Can't recall. And others later had their own fantasy versions. Metro studied their own version and a summary can be found here. See figure 1-3.
http://media.metro.net/projects_stud...-2009-0722.pdf
__________________

MarshallKnight liked this post
2Easy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2015, 07:33 AM   #1827
2Easy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Inglewood, CA
Posts: 70
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
Currently it's just the lack of funding; there's plenty of support for it and it's in Metro's long range plan. If SR2 passes next year, there's a good chance that it will get added to the current planned phases.
Where have you heard that there's plenty of support? It's not really even on anyone's radar yet. I think that there are tons of projects ahead of it including:

East side extension
South Bay green line extension
405/sepulveda pass line
Crenshaw line north extension
Santa Ana corridor
Slauson line from LAX to downtown

Some others that I can't think of. Maybe others like a Vermont line. It'll be hard to argue that Santa Monica deserves two lines ending less than a mile apart when so many areas of the county have no rail at all.
2Easy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2015, 08:50 AM   #1828
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,350
Likes (Received): 3597

I should've clarified, I meant local (e.g. Santa Monica) support, not necessarily county-wide. However, as I mentioned, it is part of the long-range plan, which means there's at least enough support within Metro that the SM extension has already been at least partially studied. I don't have access to the most current edition, but you'll find it in the 2009 edition under "Strategic Unfunded Plan -- Tier 1" (on pg. 31)

As you'll see in that same document, there are several other projects already under recommendation (as you say, higher on the priority list than the Purple SM extension) with at least partial funding. Those include the West Santa Ana Branch, Gold Line Eastside Extension, Green Line South Bay and LAX extensions and the 405/LAX corridor and several others. Vermont, sadly, is well down the priority list in Tier 2 Unfunded projects meriting further definition.

Anyway, this is a helpful list to be aware of what Metro has in mind for the next 20-30 years. If money were no object, I'm sure they'd build out all of it and soon. As things stand, Measure R2 (or whatever they wind up calling it) will be the best and quickest way to get the majority of these priority projects underway.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2015, 11:12 AM   #1829
fskobic
jarunac
 
fskobic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Amsterdam/Zagreb
Posts: 733
Likes (Received): 213

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis View Post
No , I meant the routing...wouldn't it be better to send it to Downtown Santa Monica instead of just north of it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
Ohhhh. Yeah, I think it's just a matter of cost and complexity. Constructing a line under a large boulevard is relatively simple and inexpensive, compared to routing "off-grid." The drama with BHHS has shown what you can get yourself into if you tunnel under occupied property. Then there's the question of crossing the 10 freeway, which I can only assume would be particularly complex if you wanted to run the Purple Line down, say, Lincoln or Main.

I think Metro's reasoning is that the Big Blue Bus can easily ferry "first mile/last mile" riders to Downtown SM from both the Expo (4th and Colorado) and the Purple Line (3rd and Wilshire) at a fraction of the cost of routing a subway there. There's certainly the possibility that those alternatives could be explored though once funding is in place and the final leg of the extension is a sure thing.
I completely agree with the idea that it should go to Downtown SM station. Even though it means higher costs. The psychology of the rider is important here, and the idea that someone who wants to transfer from the Purple line to the Expo line has to take a bus first (which, at least in people's minds, isn't as reliable, and has more confusing stops/directions) would discourage many people from using the metro in the first place. Metro lines are far more easy to understand (partially due to the usually small number of them), especially for tourists.

I think the costs of building a bad solution and saving some money is is far greater than investing a bit more in a far better solution.
__________________

LosAngelesSportsFan liked this post
fskobic no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2015, 02:16 PM   #1830
phoenixboi08
Registered User
 
phoenixboi08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,550
Likes (Received): 798

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis View Post
No , I meant the routing...wouldn't it be better to send it to Downtown Santa Monica instead of just north of it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
Ohhhh. Yeah, I think it's just a matter of cost and complexity. Constructing a line under a large boulevard is relatively simple and inexpensive, compared to routing "off-grid." The drama with BHHS has shown what you can get yourself into if you tunnel under occupied property. Then there's the question of crossing the 10 freeway, which I can only assume would be particularly complex if you wanted to run the Purple Line down, say, Lincoln or Main.

I think Metro's reasoning is that the Big Blue Bus can easily ferry "first mile/last mile" riders to Downtown SM from both the Expo (4th and Colorado) and the Purple Line (3rd and Wilshire) at a fraction of the cost of routing a subway there. There's certainly the possibility that those alternatives could be explored though once funding is in place and the final leg of the extension is a sure thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fskobic View Post
I completely agree with the idea that it should go to Downtown SM station. Even though it means higher costs. The psychology of the rider is important here, and the idea that someone who wants to transfer from the Purple line to the Expo line has to take a bus first (which, at least in people's minds, isn't as reliable, and has more confusing stops/directions) would discourage many people from using the metro in the first place. Metro lines are far more easy to understand (partially due to the usually small number of them), especially for tourists.

I think the costs of building a bad solution and saving some money is is far greater than investing a bit more in a far better solution.
For those of you familiar with the area, how difficult would it be to simply turn and then route it under Ocean/Nielson?

Just from my scant knowledge of the area and with the aid of a map, it seems like it'd be a tight fit.

I would agree with the idea that having both lines serving the same station is ideal.
__________________
MCRP '16

fskobic liked this post
phoenixboi08 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2015, 06:05 PM   #1831
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,350
Likes (Received): 3597

Quote:
Originally Posted by fskobic View Post
I completely agree with the idea that it should go to Downtown SM station. Even though it means higher costs. The psychology of the rider is important here, and the idea that someone who wants to transfer from the Purple line to the Expo line has to take a bus first (which, at least in people's minds, isn't as reliable, and has more confusing stops/directions) would discourage many people from using the metro in the first place. Metro lines are far more easy to understand (partially due to the usually small number of them), especially for tourists.

I think the costs of building a bad solution and saving some money is is far greater than investing a bit more in a far better solution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phoenixboi08 View Post






For those of you familiar with the area, how difficult would it be to simply turn and then route it under Ocean/Nielson?

Just from my scant knowledge of the area and with the aid of a map, it seems like it'd be a tight fit.

I would agree with the idea that having both lines serving the same station is ideal.
So this is twice that I realized I misunderstood the question -- I took "Downtown Santa Monica" to mean a different part of town altogether (Main St. south of Pico), not the Expo terminus station. That does seem doable, although it is certainly not without cost and complication. Judging roughly by how much room the Red Line needs to turn up Vermont from Wilshire, I think you could put a station at 7th/Wilshire and have it curve under those blocks to 4th St. to meet the Expo station. The big engineering question has to do with the suitability of the soil there for tunneling -- that coastal cliff area tends to be erosive and less stable in earthquakes than areas further inland that are buttressed by miles of land. But that's something I know next-to-nothing about; maybe we can get an engineer to weigh in.

In any case I agree that it's ideal, and I don't think studies have gotten into much detail so far about where the Purple terminus would go. My only thought as to why it wouldn't be deemed worthwhile is the relative rarity with which people transfer between two end-of-the-line stations.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 25th, 2015, 07:20 PM   #1832
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,688
Likes (Received): 17043

First Quarter 2015 Daily Ridership numbers for Greater LA Region

Source : http://www.apta.com/resources/statis...rship-APTA.pdf

Heavy Rail
Los Angeles / Purple & Red lines - 147,800 (2015)


Light Rail
Los Angeles / Metro-LRT - 193,600 (2015)


Suburban/Regional/Commuter Rail
Los Angeles Suburbs / MetroLink - 40,900 (2015)


Bus Ridership
Los Angeles / MTA Bus - 1.083 Million (2015)
Orange County / OC Bus - 152,400 (2015)
Long Beach / Long Beach transit - 92,800 (2015)
Santa Monica / Santa Monica's Big Blue Bus - 79,300 (2015)
San Bernardino / OMNITRANS - 45,800 (2015)
Riverside / Riverside Transit Agency - 31,500 (2015)
Santa Barbara / Santa Barbara MTD - 26,500 (2015)
Culver City / Culver CityBus - 16,000 (2015)
Torrance / Torrance Transit System - 13,800 (2015)
Oxnard / Gold Coast Transit - 12,500 (2015)
Santa Clarita / Santa Clarita Transit - 11,900 (2015)
Ventura / Ventura County Transp Comm - 2,800 (2015)
__________________
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

jchernin, Kenni, mrsmartman liked this post
Nexis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 27th, 2015, 09:00 PM   #1833
LA County Metro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 6
Likes (Received): 6

I work for Metro and would like to clear up somethings.

1. the purple line extension will extend to Wilshire and la cienega first and will be completed sometime in 2023. Then extended to centry city by 2026 and to Westwood by 2035. Metro is looking to accelerate the construction should funding become available to do so. As of right now there will be no subway to the sea (purple line all the way to santa monica).

2. The Pink line will be apart of the Crenshaw line extension north later on. The exact route is currently not determined and it will not connect directly to the purple line.

3. The 96th street station of the LAX/Crenshaw line will be built at a later date once the construction of the LAX people mover begins. the construction will start in 2017 and be completed by 2024.
__________________

dimlys1994, fskobic, Nexis, Kenni, Klausenburg and 1 others liked this post
LA County Metro no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 27th, 2015, 11:42 PM   #1834
Slartibartfas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vedunia
Posts: 11,606
Likes (Received): 5968

del
__________________
"Brexit means Brexit and we are going to make a Titanic success of it.”
Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary, UK

Last edited by Slartibartfas; August 27th, 2015 at 11:47 PM.
Slartibartfas no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 28th, 2015, 03:04 AM   #1835
Tower Dude
Registered User
 
Tower Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: 76th Street Station
Posts: 1,044
Likes (Received): 593

Quote:
Originally Posted by LA County Metro View Post
1. the purple line extension will extend to Wilshire and la cienega first and will be completed sometime in 2023. Then extended to centry city by 2026 and to Westwood by 2035. Metro is looking to accelerate the construction should funding become available to do so. As of right now there will be no subway to the sea (purple line all the way to santa monica).

So this does not preclude the possibility of a future purple line extension, it is more a matter of LA Metro not including it in their current extension plans?
__________________

"Make no small plans they lack the magic to stir men's blood!" - Daniel Burnham

"The scale is Roman and will have to be sustained."
- Charles Follen McKim (In a letter to a friend concerning the design of Penn Station)

fskobic liked this post
Tower Dude no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2015, 03:06 AM   #1836
Kenni
Admin
 
Kenni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: LATAM
Posts: 27,314

Chinatown Gold Line Station.


Chinatown Station - Los Angeles
by Andreas Adelmann, on Flickr

Red Line Station


Metro Retro
by Neil Kremer, on Flickr


Los Angeles metro station
by Marianne Williams, on Flickr
__________________
Kenni no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2015, 11:49 PM   #1837
Amexpat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oslo
Posts: 63
Likes (Received): 31

Quote:
Originally Posted by LA County Metro View Post
I work for Metro and would like to clear up somethings.
2. The Pink line will be apart of the Crenshaw line extension north later on. The exact route is currently not determined and it will not connect directly to the purple line.
Any particular reason for that? It seems that it would make sense to connect a Crenshaw line extension with the purple line.
Amexpat no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2015, 03:05 AM   #1838
jchernin
Registered User
 
jchernin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Santa Rosa/North Bay
Posts: 508
Likes (Received): 536

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amexpat View Post
Any particular reason for that? It seems that it would make sense to connect a Crenshaw line extension with the purple line.
Different technologies maybe? The Crenshaw line is light rail and the purple heavy rail.
jchernin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2015, 04:57 AM   #1839
humdoodee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 12
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by jchernin View Post
Different technologies maybe? The Crenshaw line is light rail and the purple heavy rail.
But the 7th street station handles two heavy and two light rail lines just fine. If the Crenshaw line can underpass/overpass a Purple line station, I don't see why they can't link up a LRT platform with a HRT station.
humdoodee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2015, 07:34 PM   #1840
2Easy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Inglewood, CA
Posts: 70
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by humdoodee View Post
But the 7th street station handles two heavy and two light rail lines just fine. If the Crenshaw line can underpass/overpass a Purple line station, I don't see why they can't link up a LRT platform with a HRT station.
I think you're discussing two different things. The Crenshaw line cannot interline with the purple line due to the differences in technology but there's no technological reason that they couldn't share a station and "connect".

It's almost impossible to believe that they wouldn't connect at some point and I don't believe what LA County Metro posted or maybe he/she meant that they won't interline. The map posted from LA Metro shows connections to the purple line. Metro isn't the most competent agency but they aren't completely incompetent either.
__________________
2Easy 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 11:08 AM.


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