|
Post by rubbertoe on Apr 29, 2011 12:15:30 GMT -8
Posting this here in the DC forum, since none of the other forums seemed to really be applicable. Maybe we need a separate forum for streetcar projects, now that the MTA has officially joined the effort? Here is a notice for an early scoping meeting to come up with an LPA. If you follow the link at the bottom to the official Metro streetcar page, they include a link to www.golastreetcar.org, who originally got the ball rolling.... P.S. Who needs to be contacted to get a separate streetcar forum running, would that be Bart?
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Apr 29, 2011 13:14:04 GMT -8
Posting this here in the DC forum, since none of the other forums seemed to really be applicable. Maybe we need a separate forum for streetcar projects, now that the MTA has officially joined the effort? I saw that today. The ad style reminds me of Volkswagen.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Apr 29, 2011 14:02:55 GMT -8
Good to know that MTA has joined the streetcar project.
At the very least, L.A. County's biggest transit agency needs to work together with the streetcar to make sure that they aren't stepping on any toes. I don't think that the streetcar competes with any Metro project, but between the streetcar and the Regional Connector, that's a lot of construction downtown... a lot of potential to get in each other's way ;D
And hopefully, the MTA has some construction, planning, engineering or deesign resources that the streetcar planners can use.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Apr 29, 2011 22:02:00 GMT -8
I think this thread should be in the bus forum. A streetcar in mixed traffic is even slower than a bus (As I observed while riding the famous streetcar in Portland last week), and shares many features with existing urban circulators like the DASH shuttles or Long Beach's Passport buses.
Sure, you have rails and overhead wires and longer vehicles and all that, but operationally a streetcar is similar to a downtown circulator bus.
With that in mind, I'm not thrilled about this project. Unless plans change and the streetcar is put in a transit-only lanes (shared with buses, perhaps), it will be SLOW. Portland's streetcar averages 6 mph with stops every 2 to 3 blocks, and it's unreliable due to traffic.
Now, if this project gets us more transit-only lanes on Broadway and Hill, that alone would be a huge benefit to the overall transit system, and I would certainly be in favor of that. A streetcar with exclusive right-of-way (or at least exclusive to transit vehicles) is basically fully at-grade light rail, and would be a significant improvement over existing DASH buses in the basics of reliability and speed, as well as comfort and style and tourist appeal.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Apr 30, 2011 12:50:00 GMT -8
The route is quite short, so 6 mph could still mean typically 10-15 minute rides from one part of DT to another, which could mean reasonable ridership and tourist appeal. Exclusive lanes would increase its chances to be integrated into a wider streetcar network, which is really the prize in my mind. It's better to implement it as effectively as possible so we have the beginning of a wider functional network instead of just a novelty downtown line. It would also be great to push a precedent for transit only lanes so that future projects might get built faster with less controversy than the Wilshire bus only lanes. It seems a no-brainer to me to just restripe some lanes, but people seem to lose it whenever there is a proposal to increase road capacity by dedicating a lane to public transit. If we have a few examples to point to that have worked well, it could make future approvals easier.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Apr 30, 2011 15:27:20 GMT -8
The biggest thing Transit Coalition could do for this is to demand and lobby for exclusive lanes.
Last time Streetcars ran in mixed traffic in downtown they got ripped out after a few decades because they were swallowed by traffic. Different downtown and streetcar technology, but let's make sure the folks building it actually learn from history.
Also, we should make sure that the street car hits as many Metro rail stops as is feasible. As in, it doesn't have to zoom out of the way to hit a Metro stop, but it should pick up every stop that's along the way.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Apr 30, 2011 18:23:37 GMT -8
A streetcar doesn't necessarily have to be all that fast if it is a downtown circulator, which is what this streetcar clearly aims to be. Yes, faster is better, but that's not going to be a deal breaker for me.
The biggest advantage of a streetcar like this is that it will attract more attention than the DASH buses. Visitors attending a convention need to be able to say "oh look, streetcar tracks, I wonder where those go" and if a streetcar happens along, feel like they can get on and take a ride around downtown without getting too lost because the streetcar obviously never detours from its route.
I'll admit that streetcars will help people avoid the bus cooties. If it will keep people from hopping into their car because LACC is over here and tonight's restaurant/ entertainment is here and the hotel is over there (even with the JW Marriott, plenty of Anime Expo goers prefer the other downtown hotels), I'll be happy.
And really, anything beyond the downtown core (USC to Chinatown) ought to be light rail or subway. Even within downtown, the Regional Connector would be better for Little Tokyo to LACC.
Transit-only lanes would be awesome, but the primary goal ought to be the streetcar itself.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on May 9, 2011 11:36:08 GMT -8
I haven't checked the other streets yet, but it looks like Broadway is a minimum of 57 feet wide along the entire corridor. Thats 6 traffic lanes of 9.5 feet each. I agree with others above that dedicating a lane for streetcar and transit use only makes a whole lot of sense. Except for rush hour, those streets aren't being used to anywhere close to capacity. Removing a lane of traffic and/or parking would speed up both the buses and the streetcars, with minimal loss of utility for drivers. Obviously the streetcars will have to negotiate some traffic on the turns, but a straight shot down Broadway in a dedicated lane, with signal preemption, would be the best scenario.
I think I'll head to the meeting and give them my $0.02.
RT
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on May 18, 2011 1:29:51 GMT -8
Went to the first scoping meeting-- excitement was palpable in the air. They are now accepting public comments for an alignment within the larger possible service area.
Two concerns though: steep grades on Bunker Hill activity centers and crossing the Blue/Expo line tracks.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on May 18, 2011 7:55:34 GMT -8
Who's decision would transit-only lanes for this be? MTA? County? City?
|
|
|
Post by carter on May 18, 2011 9:34:11 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on May 18, 2011 13:14:58 GMT -8
Interesting report from The Source.
Seems like there are ways they could design the streetcar route so it wouldn't cross the Blue Line/ Expo Line. Put streetcars on Figueroa near the convention center. Have streetcars in both directions on Fig.
Or, have it loop around the convention center. There's a street called "L.A. Live Way" on the backside of the convention center which could be used. Fig-Pico-L.A. Live-Chick Hearn.
Or, loop around Fig- Chick Hearn- Georgia (in front of the JW Marriott) - Olympic. LACC/ L.A. Live/ Staples Center is going to be a major destination for the streetcar, so a route like that would give convention-goers or Laker fans several chances to hop onto the streetcar.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on May 18, 2011 15:22:54 GMT -8
I had not thought about the problem with crossing Blue line tracks... but the alternatives of looping around Convention Center/LA Live is a good one. Although that means the residential block of condos and lofts east of Flower St will have no streetcar access.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on May 19, 2011 0:22:36 GMT -8
I think one of the potential benefits of the streetcar is that it can eventually be extended to the other side of the 110 and increase connections between Downtown and City West. From that perspective it's pretty important that it would be on the west side of the blue/expo lines.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on May 19, 2011 6:34:12 GMT -8
Can someone explain why having the streetcar cross the Blue/Expo Line tracks is such an issue?
Wouldn't it be possible to simply not have the streetcar catenary intersect with the light rail catenary. Leave say a 10' gap on either side so that the only interaction between the two is the actual rail crossing. That could be computer controlled so the trains don't run into each other. When the streetcar gets to the 20' gap it either uses backup batteries, ultra-capacitors, or even a flywheel for the short hop to the juice on the other side.
RT
|
|
|
Post by carter on May 19, 2011 7:53:37 GMT -8
It's actually not a technical issue as much as it is a service one. At peak hours there will be a blue or expo line train crossing Pico every 1.25 minutes in one direction or the other.
The concern is that gettin through that intersection consistetly would be a service pain in the neck.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on May 19, 2011 8:10:10 GMT -8
It's actually not a technical issue as much as it is a service one. At peak hours there will be a blue or expo line train crossing Pico every 1.25 minutes in one direction or the other. The concern is that gettin through that intersection consistetly would be a service pain in the neck. Wouldn't there be tracks over tracks problem (how would you cross them) as well as a overhead wire crossing problem.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on May 19, 2011 9:44:12 GMT -8
Wouldn't there be tracks over tracks problem (how would you cross them) as well as a overhead wire crossing problem. You would need to install diamond crossings, which are nothing unusual. They would make the ride slightly rougher and are relatively expensive to maintain. Over the last 15 years, Metro has been removing diamond crossings where now-abandoned freight lines used to cross the Blue Line.
|
|
|
Post by erict on May 19, 2011 10:12:10 GMT -8
If the streetcar gets built before the regional connector, and it connects to Union Station (lots of if's) - will there be political will to not build the Regional Connector since the streetcar will duplicate some of it's route? I hope not. It will be nice to have both.
I think the downtown streetcar should avoid crossing the blue line tracks even if it means more of a connection to LA Live than the staples center (section C3).
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on May 19, 2011 10:40:35 GMT -8
If the streetcar gets built before the regional connector, and it connects to Union Station (lots of if's) - will there be political will to not build the Regional Connector since the streetcar will duplicate some of it's route? I hope not. It will be nice to have both. I think the downtown streetcar should avoid crossing the blue line tracks even if it means more of a connection to LA Live than the staples center (section C3). No, because we already have a connector in place today........the Red and Purple Lines. The streetcar is slow moving transit within downtown LA. What if somebody wants to go from South Park to Highland Park? Or from Long Beach to South Pasadena? The streetcar is no advantage for them. The LRT connector and streetcar are mutually exclusive projects in my eyes. One serves local neighborhoods in a slow moving streetcar, whereas the LRT connector ties in 3 disconnected major rail lines into 2 (1 north-south and a second into east-west)
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on May 19, 2011 12:02:17 GMT -8
obviously the crossing CAN be done, but it would be better if they didn't, because of the issue Carter mentioned of the Blue Line/ Expo Line trains coming through way too often. also I'm thinking it could be a pain in the butt during the construction period as well.
regarding streetcar vs. regional connector: it's important that we (and especially the streetcar planners) make a very clear distinction between light rail and a streetcar. we haven't needed to make that distinction yet, with the Blue Line loop and sections of the Gold Line blurring the lines a little bit. but it's something which needs to be emphasized.
the Regional Connector will make very few stops, it will be quicker, it will be underground; whereas the streetcar will excel at hop on-hop off travel, hopefully helping Broadway get noticed, better for people being able to see where they're going, better if you don't want stairs or even a station platform.
also, we don't even know yet if we actually want the streetcar to go to Union Station. some might prefer if it headed into Chinatown, or even avoided crossing the freeway, since there aren't that many crossings to begin with.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on May 19, 2011 12:34:56 GMT -8
Not to even mention the fact that the DC provides a one-seat ride through downtown for all light rail riders, which currently does not exist. And it ties all the light rail lines together. A world of difference from the streetcar.
RT
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on May 19, 2011 13:29:39 GMT -8
Crossing the blue line is a problem?
Not at all. Have farmers field chip in the cash needed to send the blue (and expo) lines underground north of Washington, and the problem disappears.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on May 19, 2011 16:43:09 GMT -8
Crossing the blue line is a problem? Not at all. Have farmers field chip in the cash needed to send the blue (and expo) lines underground north of Washington, and the problem disappears. Brilliant! The more of that line that is underground the better. Pico would then be turned into a subway station. Time for the city and MTA to start the negotiations with AEG. RT
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on May 19, 2011 17:22:09 GMT -8
Crossing the blue line is a problem? Not at all. Have farmers field chip in the cash needed to send the blue (and expo) lines underground north of Washington, and the problem disappears. Brilliant! The more of that line that is underground the better. Pico would then be turned into a subway station. Time for the city and MTA to start the negotiations with AEG. RT In this case, we should all keep talking about how important it is that the streetcar go to LA Live and the Convention Center, AND that it would be terrible, horrible, impossible to cross the light rail tracks at grade. ;-) Unfortunately, I don't think AEG has enough money to build a new subway station and 1.5 miles of trench. They are already asking for a couple $100 million in loan guarantees and tax breaks to make the stadium project happen.
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on May 19, 2011 22:43:02 GMT -8
Brilliant! The more of that line that is underground the better. Pico would then be turned into a subway station. Time for the city and MTA to start the negotiations with AEG. RT In this case, we should all keep talking about how important it is that the streetcar go to LA Live and the Convention Center, AND that it would be terrible, horrible, impossible to cross the light rail tracks at grade. ;-) Unfortunately, I don't think AEG has enough money to build a new subway station and 1.5 miles of trench. They are already asking for a couple $100 million in loan guarantees and tax breaks to make the stadium project happen. You know how the tracks currently have that awkward crossing with the freeway on-ramps? And how that will be problematic with a train every 2 minutes? And how a football stadium will requires higher frequencies AND generate additional traffic on the freeway? Well, the ONLY way I can see it working is if the tracks are underground. Dont do it for the transit people, do it for the LOS of the freeway onramps! (In LA, it seems to be easier to sell a project if it benefits cars, ie, see discussion on widening streets as "mitigation" for the expo line. Putting the regional connector out of the way of the all important car is the "mitigation" needed for a football stadium. The fact that it benefits the streetcar is a transit bonus, never mind having pico be an actual station capable of handling large crowds)
|
|
|
Post by masonite on May 20, 2011 8:13:55 GMT -8
In this case, we should all keep talking about how important it is that the streetcar go to LA Live and the Convention Center, AND that it would be terrible, horrible, impossible to cross the light rail tracks at grade. ;-) Unfortunately, I don't think AEG has enough money to build a new subway station and 1.5 miles of trench. They are already asking for a couple $100 million in loan guarantees and tax breaks to make the stadium project happen. You know how the tracks currently have that awkward crossing with the freeway on-ramps? And how that will be problematic with a train every 2 minutes? And how a football stadium will requires higher frequencies AND generate additional traffic on the freeway? Well, the ONLY way I can see it working is if the tracks are underground. Dont do it for the transit people, do it for the LOS of the freeway onramps! (In LA, it seems to be easier to sell a project if it benefits cars, ie, see discussion on widening streets as "mitigation" for the expo line. Putting the regional connector out of the way of the all important car is the "mitigation" needed for a football stadium. The fact that it benefits the streetcar is a transit bonus, never mind having pico be an actual station capable of handling large crowds) While I agree that putting the Pico station underground would be great, I think it is pure fantasy to think that AEG would be paying for this. The Convention Center/Stadium project I'm sure barely pencils out as is and saying they have to spend hundreds of millions of dollars for this as well would kill it. It simply is not going to happen. They might make a small contribution towards this, but not pay for the whole thing. AEG has been a major player in raising funds for the Streetcar (as they should).
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on May 20, 2011 13:26:30 GMT -8
I have to agree with Masonite.
AEG is already responsible for both Staples Center and L.A. Live being there (that includes the giant JW Marriott). Both of these projects represent huge investments into downtown Los Angeles and they have helped improve the convention center neighborhood and made it more interesting.
They have also undoubtedly added to the traffic at Pico Station.
On top of that, I do think this football stadium will be a valuable asset to downtown. That will keep AEG busy for quite a while.
I believe in making sure Corporate America pays its fair share, but if AEG puts up a large enough amount of money for the streetcar project itself, and maybe some money for improving the walk between the convention center and the Blue Line, I really don't see them as the magic genie that will solve our at-grade light rail problems.
I also don't see why we can't have the streetcar "cross" the Blue Line at 11th or Olympic instead of at Pico. Why force the issue?
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on May 20, 2011 13:32:34 GMT -8
AEG is already responsible for both Staples Center and L.A. Live being there (that includes the giant JW Marriott). Exactly. Thats millions of car trips and transit trips. It needs to be mitigated.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on May 20, 2011 13:48:07 GMT -8
AEG is already responsible for both Staples Center and L.A. Live being there (that includes the giant JW Marriott). Exactly. Thats millions of car trips and transit trips. It needs to be mitigated. Agreed. And we need to make sure that AEG does something to help the situation. The streetcar ought to be part of that. Improvements to Pico Station, also. [EDIT: BTW, whatever mitigation AEG was required to do for Staples Center or L.A. Live has probably already been paid back. ] Putting the Blue Line underground south of the 10 Freeway though, would be really pushing it. And in any case, that would be separate from the streetcar. To repeat: why not Olympic?
|
|