|
Post by James Fujita on Jul 24, 2007 20:01:25 GMT -8
Roadtrainer: I much prefer attacking both sides over just attacking one side, and so you have my thanks. however, in all honesty, we are going to have to work with both sides; for as the joke goes: "How many third partyers does it take to screw in a light bulb? we'll never know!"
the idea of recruiting the BRU is a bold one, even if they'll never go for it. we whine and complain and moan about their antics, but they are using time-honored and effective methods of gaining attention- rallies, marches, waving signs; just think of all the movements that got huge boosts from these kinds of stunts: Dr. King's rousing speeches in Washington or 500,000 immigrants marching on city hall last year, just to name two! well, I have a dream that one day the sons and daughters of Los Angeles shall be able to ride together on the train in brotherhood; all that's lacking is the million transit-rider march (Critical Mass Transit?) to get our point across to the KNBCs and the CNNs of the world.
the BRU will never go for it; how about the UTU instead? they have a stake in keeping the transit funds flowing, don't they? one for all and all that
|
|
|
Post by nickv on Jul 24, 2007 21:51:00 GMT -8
The TTC Newsletter posted contact information of members in the Senate for anybody interested in participating in the transit fund debate: How You Can Help: You can still call your state Senator and express your desire to see all of the Spillover directed to public transit operations. The following members are important to contact: Don Perata 916-651-4009 Sac. District 510-286-1333; Speaker Fabian Nรบรฑez 916-319-2046, District 213-620-4646; Alex Padilla 916-651-4020, District 818-901-5588; Bob Margett 916-651-4029, District 626-914-5046; Alan Lowenthal 916-651-4027, District 562-495-4766; Jeff Denham 916-651-4012, District 209-726-5495; Bob Dutton 916-651-4031; Dave Cogdill 916-651-4014, District 209-599-8540; Gil Cedillo 916-651-4022, District 213-612-9566. Source: www.thetransitcoalition.us/NewsLetterWeb/NL20070723a.htm
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Aug 10, 2007 14:08:58 GMT -8
So...what's going on w/ the Expo construction activities? Is everything hold due to our budget or is Metro/Buildexpo still working on the Expo line?
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Aug 10, 2007 15:56:58 GMT -8
So...what's going on w/ the Expo construction activities? Is everything hold due to our budget or is Metro/Buildexpo still working on the Expo line? LA Officials Break Ground On ExpoL.A. officials break ground on the Expo Line By Rong-Gong Lin II, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer 12:11 PM PDT, August 10, 2007 Local officials gathered this morning for what they described as a milestone for L.A.'s fledging rail system: the groundbreaking of major construction on the Expo Line. The route from downtown to Culver City has been planned, debated and revised many times over the last three decades. And officials said today they were excited to finally have a rail route to the traffic-clogged Westside under construction. "We have entered a new era of public transportation," said Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. "L.A. is expected to grow 30% in the next 25 years. Just how many cars will clog our highways ... the answer is too many." The $640-million project will include eight new stations and is expected to open in 2010. The Expo Line will run through southwest L.A. on an existing rail right-of-way โ something that has significantly reduced costs. But there have been concerns that the route does not hit some major Westside destinations such as West Hollywood, the Beverly Center area, Beverly Hills and the Miracle Mile. Officials today say they believe there will be a ridership for the line โ particularly if "phase two" from Culver City to Santa Monica is built. But that section remains a question because of budget battles in Sacramento, they said. The work now underway consists of building a huge trench in the USC-Exposition Park area. MTA is also at work building a new light-rail route from downtown to East L.A.
Also this from SSP...and Jan Perry was there and said some things about the light rails. She mentioned that phase 1 of the expo line to culver city is already fully funded...
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Aug 10, 2007 16:57:07 GMT -8
Then why does MTA.net note we are missing funding for $314 million for Expo Phase I?
"As a result of the pending budget cuts, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) is poised to postpone funding upcoming transportation projects throughout the State, including $3.6 million for grade crossing for Metrolink, $43 million for the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension project and $314 million for construction of the Expo Line from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City.".
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Aug 10, 2007 20:14:48 GMT -8
My understanding from a few politicians is that the first priority of the CTC after this budget mess is to approve the $314 million for Expo. Perhaps our reaction was premature...or it caused the powers that be to focus on mass transit projects in the next budget cycle.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Sept 5, 2007 23:50:08 GMT -8
We're back on track!
Los Angeles Times: Thursday, September 6, 2007
State OKs final piece of Expo light-rail funding: The line will run between downtown L.A. and Culver City. By Rong-Gong Lin II, Staff Writer
The California Transportation Commission on Wednesday approved a crucial piece of funding for construction of the Exposition Line light-rail line, committing the final $314 million needed to build the project.
"It's good news. And it's good to see the state keeping its promises," said David Yale, director of regional planning for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
Major construction on the 8.6-mile route between downtown Los Angeles and Culver City began in August and is expected to be completed in 2010. The line will cost about $640 million to build.
The state commission also approved a $7.6-million project to widen the Century Freeway as it approaches Sepulveda Boulevard, a familiar bottleneck encountered by motorists heading to the Los Angeles International Airport.
The Sepulveda offramp will also be widened from two lanes to three.
The project should alleviate some of the traffic backups on the freeway, Yale said.
Construction could begin by mid-2008, and is expected to be completed by October 2009, said Dave Sotero, an MTA spokesman.
|
|
|
Post by hooligan on Sept 7, 2007 9:02:54 GMT -8
No word on Phase 2 of the project?
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Sept 7, 2007 17:05:52 GMT -8
Still waiting to hear from the Expo Construction Authority on the draft EIR...and I wouldn't count on it being finished for another 1-2 months, although grade crossing data might be released earlier.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 7, 2007 17:37:21 GMT -8
Speaking of grade crossings...what's going on with Phase I? Are they redesigning the crossings near Dorsey?
|
|
|
Post by erict on Sept 11, 2007 11:26:03 GMT -8
They approved the Trousdale Park station - from the Projects board meetings (hopefully they get the $$$):
....Lastly, in December 2006, the Expo Board approved transferring $450,000 from contingency for some initial design of the Trousdale station. Though this station was not included in the baseline project adopted by the Metro Board, it was environmentally cleared in the FEIS/FEIR and there has been support from elected offcials as well as Expo Park stakeholders for the inclusion of this station. Because this station would better serve both USC and the Expo Park museums, and is integral for handling passengers during special events at the Coliseum, Expo staffbelieve that this station is crucial for the effcient operation of the project. As a result, the Expo Board has requested that Metro fully fund the design and construction of this station in the amount of $7 milion, and take the appropriate steps to amend the Locally Preferred Alternative and Record of Decision to include this station as part of the project. In order for this station to open with the rest of the project, a funding commitment from Metro must be received by November 1,2007.
|
|
|
Post by whitmanlam on Sept 13, 2007 21:18:30 GMT -8
Oh, finally some traffic relief after Football Games....for a while... even the opposing team's running backs were moving faster than our bus.
So, is it too much to ask for USC to chip in some money for this station? And a very practical station at that. It does serve their vital interests and elevates the image status of the University to have a true campus station. What's a few million to them, with all that ticket money ?
|
|
|
Post by erict on Sept 14, 2007 2:51:44 GMT -8
USC is not giving any money for this station, at least from what I am reading.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Sept 14, 2007 5:42:45 GMT -8
History will not be very kind to USC (or at least with its current leadership) when it comes to its efforts with the Expo Line. Fortunately, the county persevered and is doing the best they can. As time marches on, and with the opening of the line, I look forward to a change of attitude with what should be a high utilization of this new station.
|
|
|
Post by wad on Sept 14, 2007 22:51:05 GMT -8
USC is not giving any money for this station, at least from what I am reading. I wonder if anyone will photograph a Reasoner riding the trains a la BRU.
|
|
|
Post by whitmanlam on Sept 15, 2007 15:11:13 GMT -8
I'm pretty sure the Reasoning people drive monster guzzler SUV's a la Governator Schwartzenegger. It's surprising how hypocritical experts can be when they know they can never put their theories into practice.
I'm going to the Expo community meeting tonight at Galen Center. Hopefully I can cause a ruckus or at least eat some free heurd'voures. Is that how it's spelled ??
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Sept 18, 2007 8:29:11 GMT -8
September 18, 2007 -- CNN
U.S. traffic: Bad and getting worse
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Drivers waste nearly an entire work week each year sitting in traffic on the way to and from their jobs, according to a national study released Tuesday.
The nation's drivers languished in traffic delays for a total of 4.2 billion hours in 2005, up from 4 billion the year before, according to the Texas Traffic Institute's urban mobility report. That's about 38 hours per driver.
"Things are bad and they're getting worse," said Alan Pisarski, a transportation expert and the author of "Commuting in America."
"We've used up the capacity that had been bequeathed to us by a previous generation, and we haven't replaced it," Pisarski said.
The study summed it up this way: "Too many people, too many trips over too short of a time period on a system that is too small."
The study estimates that drivers wasted 2.9 billion gallons of fuel while sitting in traffic. Together with the lost time, traffic delays cost the nation $78.2 billion, the study estimates. See map of most congested areas ยป
High gasoline prices appear to have cut into optional driving but not commuting to work, said David Schrank, an associate research scientist at the Texas Transportation Institute, which is part of Texas A&M University.
"We're really not seeing drops in the peak travel times," said Schrank, a co-author of the study.
About three-quarters of all commuters drive alone to work, according to census data.
The study provided detailed information on traffic congestion in the nation's 85 largest metropolitan areas.
The Los Angeles metro area had the worst congestion, delaying drivers an average of 72 hours a year. It was followed by Atlanta, Georgia; San Francisco, California; Washington; and Dallas, Texas.
LEAST CONGESTED METRO AREAS Brownsville, Texas Spokane, Washington Akron, Ohio Anchorage, Alaska Corpus Christi, Texas Rochester, New York Beaumont, Texas Buffalo, New York Springfield, Massachusetts Laredo, Texas
The least congested metro areas were Spokane, Washington, and Brownsville, Texas, where drivers were delayed an average of eight hours a year.
The study offers a menu of options for addressing congestion, including adding roads or lanes where needed, improving public transportation and changing driving patterns through flexible work schedules, telecommuting and carpooling.
"The problem has grown too rapidly and is too complex for only one technology or service to be 'the solution' in most regions," the report said.
Atlanta has the second worst congestion in the country, though there has been some improvement, according to the study. In 2005, Atlanta drivers wasted an average of 60 hours a year in traffic delays -- down from 70 hours a decade earlier.
A 2005 task force appointed by Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue called for directing more resources toward mitigating traffic congestion in the Atlanta area.
But the region's population is growing so fast that planners are having a tough time dealing with the increase in automobiles, said Jane Hayse, chief of transportation planning for the Atlanta Regional Commission.
"With the pace of growth that we have here, it's pretty difficult to reduce congestion," Hayse said. "Trying to keep it at today's level is really our goal."
The Atlanta metropolitan area added 890,000 people from 2000 to 2006, more than any other metro area in the country, according to census estimates. There were 5.1 million people in the Atlanta area in 2006.
|
|
Mac
Full Member
Posts: 192
|
Post by Mac on Sept 22, 2007 14:39:54 GMT -8
Theres been a lot of construction near USC, which seems to be a good sign. For about a while, I didn't even see a single truck! Looks very nice, but i still wish there would be a USC station.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Sept 22, 2007 19:46:55 GMT -8
I'm afraid you're behind the times, but the Trousdale station just got approved, to my understanding.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 22, 2007 20:23:46 GMT -8
I'm afraid you're behind the times, but the Trousdale station just got approved, to my understanding. Great news!!!
|
|
|
Post by tonyw79sfv on Sept 30, 2007 18:54:36 GMT -8
USC should be proud to have their own rail station. Sure UCLA can claim they're near Beverly Hills while mocking the fact that USC is near South LA, but USC got rail.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Oct 18, 2007 15:16:02 GMT -8
^ I just read last month's Board agenda, and saw (as reported here) that Trousdale was approved! (Yeah, I'm a bit behind the times!)
Very happy about this. Not happy about USC's intransigence. That university will have all the benefit but none of the cost.
At least the Metro staff is looking at the long-term picture. It didn't make sense to not build a station at Trousdale.
BTW, the station should be called either "Coliseum" or "Exposition Park". No mention of USC is necessary.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Oct 18, 2007 15:42:06 GMT -8
There is something to be said, however, when the line and the station becomes a success, to point out who were the heroes and who were the villains.
As much as we should knock on Metro when they screw up or make bad policy, we should defend them and give them the right attaboys/girls when they get something done right.
I look forward to a successful Trousdale station, and (frankly) to knock the Expo detractors at USC if that station's success becomes more well-known.
|
|
|
Post by whitmanlam on Oct 18, 2007 16:14:10 GMT -8
I hope that maybe in the future, the Trousdale Station can have a pedestrian bridge. It's just my thought that Exposition Blvd. is too dangerous to cross at times (especially at night) and a pedestrian bridge over the busy street would keep the danger to a minimum.
I look forward to 2010, even more forward when this thing gets built out to the Santa Monica Promenade or even the Pier.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Oct 18, 2007 20:45:16 GMT -8
I hope that maybe in the future, the Trousdale Station can have a pedestrian bridge. It's just my thought that Exposition Blvd. is too dangerous to cross at times (especially at night) and a pedestrian bridge over the busy street would keep the danger to a minimum. I look forward to 2010, even more forward when this thing gets built out to the Santa Monica Promenade or even the Pier. I hear what you're saying, but if the MTA built a bridge for USC's students while telling the parents of Dorsey students that their kids have to cross the tracks that might not look too good politically.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Oct 21, 2007 2:35:43 GMT -8
What's happening with Dorsey High School? Will this grade-seperation issue delay the opening of the Expo Line? Run up additional costs?
And what about Culver City? Are they not shelving out any cash for the line b/c they believe the MTA are not fiscally responsible?
|
|
|
Post by Transit Coalition on Oct 21, 2007 7:19:21 GMT -8
A: See story below. It could or it may not delay the opening of Phase I. It depends upon resolution of this issue and what political solution is taken. So, either the costs will fit in the existing budget or Metro will have to allocate funds to create the recommended solution.
A: Culver City is working with Metro. This is a "Why do you beat your wife?" type of question, not based upon any facts.
What's missing here? Perhaps transit advocates?
Los Angeles Times: Sunday, October 21, 2007
Expo Line plan runs into resistance: A proposed train crossing near an L.A. high school will make an intersection safer, officials contend. Not so fast, critics say.
By Jeffrey L. Rabin and Howard Blume Staff Writers
Dorsey High School is the focal point of an increasingly heated fight between transit officials determined to build a light-rail line from downtown Los Angeles to the Westside, and Crenshaw District residents who fear that fast-moving trains will threaten the safety of students crossing the tracks.
The first leg of the rail line, scheduled to open in 2010, will run near the 2,000-student high school where at 3:08 p.m. most weekdays, chaos reigns.
After school, hundreds of students flood across the intersection of Exposition Boulevard and Farmdale Avenue, walking home or awaiting pickup. Ice cream trucks beckon. Cars wait six-deep in all directions, sometimes blocking traffic when they pull up to and away from the curb. Students walk or run past the scene or loiter under the mature pepper trees in the boulevard's grassy median -- an old railroad right-of-way that soon will become the path for trains carrying commuters between downtown L.A. and Culver City.
Critics insist that running trains at 35 mph across the intersection is unsafe. To avoid potential collisions between trains, students and motorists, they want the tracks built above or below ground, but not at street level. To do anything less, in their view, is environmental racism.
"This project is unfair to this community and the students who live here," said Beverly Manuel, Dorsey's dean of students, as she helped police the mass exodus Thursday. "If this were anyplace else, changing this design would not be an issue."
Opponents of the design note that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board last month approved spending an extra $23.3 million to add a station at USC/Exposition Park and to pay for safety improvements at several points along the Expo Line route.
But transit officials say they only have the money to pay for a street-level crossing at Dorsey. To elevate the rail line across the intersection would cost at least an extra $25 million, further straining the Expo Line project's $663.3-million budget.
Richard Thorpe, chief executive of the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority, said the intersection will be much safer than it is now with the installation of traffic and warning lights, wider sidewalks, bells and barriers to prevent people and cars from crossing the tracks when a train is approaching.
Thorpe points to an excellent safety record on MTA's Gold Line, which runs near schools between downtown L.A. and Pasadena.
The bureaucracy of the Los Angeles Unified School District, belatedly, is joining the public debate. After several years of restrained analyses, district officials have been stirred to action by community activists who have appealed to school administrators, visited school board members and taken over a local neighborhood council.
The construction authority cannot lay tracks across intersections along the rail line without the approval of the state Public Utilities Commission, which has jurisdiction over safety at railroad crossings.
After touring the route and reviewing the record, Timothy Alan Simon, a commissioner on the public utilities board, last week rejected community protests and gave preliminary approval for running trains across nine intersections along Exposition Boulevard. The lone exception was the Dorsey crossing.
Simon, a San Francisco attorney and former appointments secretary to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, said he wanted to hear the Crenshaw community's concerns.
"The speed of the trains through the crossing is a safety issue," he said.
Simon has scheduled a public hearing Nov. 5 at Dorsey. The following day in Culver City, the commissioner and an administrative law judge will hold a formal evidentiary hearing on whether or not to allow the construction authority to proceed with the street-level crossing.
The Dorsey crossing is the last on an 8.6-mile route that is still awaiting state regulatory approval, even though activists also have filed formal objections to the street-level design elsewhere. The tracks will lie within 100 feet of five schools and close to nine others.
Construction of the rail line and other transit projects has become a major goal of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and other elected officials in the area. But the Expo Line now entails political as well as potential safety risks.
Resistance to the project's design is deepening, especially in the neighborhoods that surround Dorsey, one of a handful of Los Angeles high schools that remain predominantly black.
All those elements came to the fore Wednesday night at a community forum that drew more than 100 people to the school's auditorium.
Damien Goodmon, a community activist who has spearheaded opposition to the Expo Line's design, told the crowd that "Dorsey is the poster child for all that is wrong with this project."
Goodmon noted that the rail line will run in a fenced-off trench for several blocks near USC and that Culver City officials have demanded an above-ground station in their community. He also accused construction authority officials of having a double standard about safety.
L.A. Unified board member Marguerite Poindexter LaMotte likened the dispute to a latter-day civil rights struggle.
"Nothing will happen that you don't want to happen in our community if you stand together," she said.
LaMotte vowed to oppose the Expo Line project unless changes were made to protect the safety of Dorsey students.
Steve J. Bagby Sr., president of the Dorsey High Alumni Assn., urged the crowd to get involved but also emphasized that critics were not opposed to the transit project.
"Everybody is for the Expo Line. We just want it to be safe," he said.
A stream of speakers joined the critics.
"Environmental racism is alive and well," said Michelle Colbert, a member of a local neighborhood council. She challenged City Councilman Herb Wesson, who was the only public official who has a say in the Expo Line matter to attend the forum.
Wesson is a voting member and vice chairman of the Exposition Construction Authority's board of directors, which approved the street-level design.
The councilman, who once held the powerful post of state Assembly speaker, upset many in the crowd when he said that even if he became the one vote on the seven-member Exposition board to oppose the current design, it would not accomplish anything.
The construction authority's board members include City Councilman Bernard C. Parks, county Supervisors Yvonne B. Burke and Zev Yaroslavsky, and other elected officials.
Parks, Burke and Yaroslavsky also sit on the board of the MTA, which has ultimate authority over spending for the Expo Line and will operate the trains. None of them attended the community forum, but all voted last month for safety enhancements near USC and Los Angeles Trade Tech College.
Villaraigosa, another key player, missed the vote on the USC alterations. The mayor controls four seats on the 13-member MTA board.
"Obviously, the health and safety of the people living along the Expo Line are important and a top priority for me and the MTA," he said Friday.
Last spring, Burke asked Thorpe to present options for dealing with safety concerns at Dorsey. Thorpe told reporters that three options were considered: the street-level crossing; a pedestrian bridge over the tracks that would cost $5 million; and running the trains over the intersection on an aerial structure. The last option would cost at least an extra $25 million, he said.
Thorpe said the added USC/Exposition Park station addressed concerns about how to handle crowds from a major event, such as a football game at the nearby Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.
Thorpe said the MTA had agreed to slow the trains from 55 mph to 35 mph at Dorsey before and after school. Barriers would lower to block off the tracks for passing trains, which won't stop at the intersection.
Critics cited the recent collision of a Gold Line train traveling at 20 mph and an SUV that ran through a closed crossing gate in Highland Park as evidence of the potential danger of the Dorsey crossing. Community activist Goodmon said the SUV "crumpled like a potato chip bag."
Back at the intersection of Exposition and Farmdale, a fight broke out at 3:15 p.m. Thursday between two girls. A van screeched to a halt to avoid hitting a police officer who dashed over to break things up. Some students ran over to watch. Others lined up at the ice cream trucks. Younger students, from an elementary school north of Exposition, crossed unsupervised. An older boy skateboarded down the middle of Farmdale. Another student, riding a bike without a helmet, shot through the intersection, ignoring stop signs.
"Kids are kids," said Manuel, Dorsey's dean of students. "You will have students who will try to beat the train. Someone is going to end up being killed right here on this spot."
jeffrey.rabin@latimes.com & howard.blume@latimes.com
|
|
Mac
Full Member
Posts: 192
|
Post by Mac on Oct 21, 2007 14:24:45 GMT -8
This issue is going to cause a lot of heated arguments. Well here are my points:
1) There are kids, they don't know better, and of coarse they are going to try to beat the tracks. 2) Many cars travel at 30-40 mph or even higher. And agian, kids don't know better and will run across the street. But if thats the case, then why do we allow people to build schools near mini-highways, and then we go against the building of a rail line that is inclosed off, exept at the intersection? 3) We can't afford the grade separate the tracks, unless the state or government gives us a little extra to what they already have given us. 4) We can always build either an overpass or an underpass, then seal up the intersection not allowing anyone from crossing. This would probably be the most coss-effective way of solving this, but would would need some sort of way to let the handicapped cross.(ramps?)
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Oct 21, 2007 21:42:26 GMT -8
I have little sympathy for this neighborhood and school. They had more than enough time to raise concerns during the lengthy environmental process.
Contrast that situation to that of the Culver Junction station. That community has been involved since the outset to get that station raised..
I was at the public review meeting at Dorsey High. There was no great outcry then. Some people did have concerns. But I remember officials very clearly explaining the criteria used to determine whether or not to grade-separate. And that seemed to be the end of it.
I think that now, the responsibility should lie with the school. They need to work with the community to determine how best to safely release students after school.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Oct 21, 2007 21:56:50 GMT -8
BTW, I do think the line should be designed with safety in mind. For instance, they should build a fence along the track near the school. And I also don't mind slowing the trains down on weekdays during the times when kids are arriving and leaving school.
But I don't think it's necessary to grade-separate. You can't give in to every squeaky wheel along every line. Kids are in no more danger here than those whose schools are situated near a major boulevard with traffic whizzing by.
Besides, we already have rail near schools. The existing Blue Line and Gold Lines already pass by schools. And the Eastside Gold Line is going to pass directly in front of multiple schools.
Just because you don't get your way doesn't make it "environmental racism". This project will bring tens of thousands of commuters -- many from that neighborhood -- to their jobs. And this last-second issue could severely delay the opening of the line.
|
|