|
Post by metrocenter on May 8, 2010 14:47:47 GMT -8
So is your meta message that you think the MTA is showing favoritism to USC because of black poles and patterned concrete? Come on. Could it be they just realized silver poles don't look as nice black ones in this combination in past installations so they changed the spec? Frankly, the cost of poles in either anodized or black is probably similar if not identical in this quantity and I think that if they can make cost effective, minor changes to the design to better integrate with the surroundings - why not? All the poles arrived at approximately the same time. Only the poles near USC are black. That doesn't look like learning from experience. That looks like a decision by someone to personalize the look around USC. If they were similar cost whether anodized or black, then why didn't they do the entire line with black poles? Now it may well be that Expo worked with the local stakeholders near Expo Park/USC Station (in this case, USC and Exposition Park) to make the station look good in that area. That in itself is not a bad thing. Frankly, it's good that Expo has reached out to local stakeholders and listened to what they want. But it does lead to two questions. First, if Expo did work with USC on design, why would it do that after having said it was not going to do that? And second, why would there be any such customization in that one area (like the black poles) after there was there so much emphasis at the public meetings that Expo would have an identical look-and-feel throughout the line?
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on May 8, 2010 20:33:20 GMT -8
"Frankly, the cost of poles in either anodized or black is probably similar if not identical in this quantity"l
Same thing with the "brick pattern" on the retaining walls. If the walls were going to be patterned and painted (to prevent graffitti?) you might as well pick a nice pattern.
Personally, wish Expo had been able to customize the stations to each neighborhood, rather than going with the same, industrial / modern look. But if the color of the pole is going to get them accused of environmental racism, I can see why they went with the one for all of the stations.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 9, 2010 1:59:13 GMT -8
Brick pattern was absolutely necessary so that the trench walls wouldn't visually separate USC from Exposition Park. They insisted on grade separation there but grade separation comes with such ugly and obtrusive structures.
Sound walls are simply molded concrete. There is no paint on them, only graffiti-resistant coating. There will also be landscaping next to them so that they will eventually mostly disappear from sight. Also note that the wave pattern is far mar complicated than the brick pattern. Sound walls were made by a concrete company in San Diego. The simple brick pattern on the trench walls was molded on-site.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on May 9, 2010 7:16:27 GMT -8
Brick pattern was absolutely necessary so that the trench walls wouldn't visually separate USC from Exposition Park. They insisted on grade separation there but grade separation comes with such ugly and obtrusive structures. I fail to see how Steven Sample wanting the train underground (he never said above ground) would provide "ugly and obtrusive structures". The Gold Line is not "ugly" or "obtrusive" during some of its trenches toward Pasadena.
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on May 9, 2010 9:31:44 GMT -8
Only the poles near USC are black. That doesn't look like learning from experience. That looks like a decision by someone to personalize the look around USC. If they were similar cost whether anodized or black, then why didn't they do the entire line with black poles? That would look horrible - black poles are stark against light color backgrounds (e.g. houses that are mostly beige, white stucco) that exist on most of the line - but work well with the dark red brick that is most every USC and museum building. As I said, the price is the same. They have professional planners working this out who have a background in design and city planning and, yes, made a decision to personalize the look. How is this favoritism? It's just design - the costs are the same. It seems like you think everything must look the same everywhere or it's somehow favoritism. I strongly disagree. I also hate beige. ;D
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 9, 2010 13:57:29 GMT -8
It seems like you think everything must look the same everywhere or it's somehow favoritism. I strongly disagree. I also hate beige. ;D No, I don't think that. I do think that the industrial-looking poles that stretch for five miles west of Vermont look like crap compared to the black poles being installed between Vermont and Figueroa. They have professional planners working this out who have a background in design and city planning and, yes, made a decision to personalize the look. How is this favoritism? It's just design - the costs are the same. Black doesn't look good everywhere, but those unfinished gray poles look good nowhere. Are there any colors in these planners' palettes? If any planner thinks those unfinished poles look as good as the black poles, I certainly would have to question the quality of their "background in design".
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 9, 2010 14:09:53 GMT -8
Note that the Expo station poles (not the overhead-catenary-system poles) were originally designed to be stainless steel. But in order to cut down the costs, they later went with painted carbon steel. So, the aqua-colored poles that you see happened after the cost cut-down.
Roland Genick is a highly respected international urban architect. I wouldn't question his qualifications. Also, as others have noted, colors were chosen after public input and urban-design committees.
I think galvanized steel looks OK on ballasted sections, which have gray gravel. The sections on Flower and on Exposition by USC are colored-concrete embedded track, and black poles there might give the appearance of street-lighting poles.
I just had new rear struts on my car and, wow, what a difference it made in ride and handling. So, now, I'm hesitant to drive it on the very, very rough Exposition Boulevard to take pictures. Perhaps I should break them in for a while. LOL
|
|
|
Post by trackman on May 9, 2010 17:05:27 GMT -8
Note that the Expo station poles (not the overhead-catenary-system poles) were originally designed to be stainless steel. But in order to cut down the costs, they later went with painted carbon steel. So, the aqua-colored poles that you see happened after the cost cut-down. Roland Genick is a highly respected international urban architect. I wouldn't question his qualifications. Also, as others have noted, colors were chosen after public input and urban-design committees. I think galvanized steel looks OK on ballasted sections, which have gray gravel. The sections on Flower and on Exposition by USC are colored-concrete embedded track, and black poles there might give the appearance of street-lighting poles. I just had new rear struts on my car and, wow, what a difference it made in ride and handling. So, now, I'm hesitant to drive it on the very, very rough Exposition Boulevard to take pictures. Perhaps I should break them in for a while. LOL Is there a 'specific plan' in the USC area that might have required the poles to meet a certain standard?
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 9, 2010 21:56:44 GMT -8
Quick side comment. This year marks 20 years since the opening of the Blue Line. So it might be useful to take a look at the past in order to put the coming projects in context.
Since 1990, Metro has opened an average of 35 rail stations per decade. However, the first decade (the 1990s) 48 stations were opened while in the second decade (the 2000s) it was only 24 stations.
I realize all this is very simplistic, but stay with me for a second. If Metro manages to complete all six rail projects planned for the 2010s (Expo 1 and 2, Gold Foothill to Azusa, Crenshaw 1, and Regional Connector, and Purple to Fairfax), it will add around 36 new stations in the next decade. That's a huge improvement over the decade of the 2000s, which suffered due to the sins of Metro's contractors in the 1990s.
Of course if 30/10 gets the go-ahead, that number could be much higher. In fact, if 30/10 gets implemented, the 2010s could yield more stations than even the 1990s.
Of course quality is far more than just quantity. But at a minimum, looking at stations/year built can give some indication of Metro's ability to expand its system and fulfill its mandate to move people.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on May 10, 2010 7:26:28 GMT -8
On the subject of aerial structures, here are two photos of basic precast concrete from the Miami Metro - not quite what Expo has done with its urban design.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on May 10, 2010 18:29:13 GMT -8
The vines climbing up the support structure in the last photo remind me of the old comment: "Doctors bury their mistakes. Lawyers visit theirs at the State Pen. Architects call the local garden supply and ask what they have in the way of really fast growing ivy." Regarding the whole discussion of "exterior decoration". Having lived through the "dark ages" of Los Angeles area transit (1963-1990), I'll accept anything with steel rails and overhead wire. I remember the Pacific Electric line that passed my house in Monrovia had its original 1903 wooden poles, which were so aged and weathered that woodpeckers built nests at the tops and stored acorns in the cracks. Had the line lasted into the era of environmental consciousness, we rail partisans might have invoked the Endangered Species Act, and enlisted the Audubon Society and the World Wildlife Federation.
|
|
|
Post by redwings105th on May 10, 2010 19:02:50 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on May 11, 2010 7:08:42 GMT -8
That overpass does look terrible, and we are getting better with Expo. However, I still think that more could have been done with the concrete.
|
|
|
Post by roadtrainer on May 11, 2010 7:28:52 GMT -8
That overpass does look terrible, and we are getting better with Expo. However, I still think that more could have been done with the concrete. Agreed 100% I like the Bart going through the East-bay ..now that's a good looking grade separation! Sincerely The Roadtrainer
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 11, 2010 8:23:48 GMT -8
Back then when my girlfriend and I did this rendering, this was our vision for the poles and fences. I remember putting extra shine on those aqua poles in PhotoShop. I guess it has come nowhere close. All we ended up with are as-cheap-and-ugly-as-possible galvanized-steel poles that will corrode in a few years. LOL But I agree with bobdavis that I will take anything on rails, especially good old at-grade light-rail, which is back after the extinction period in the Dark Age. Expo is still being built very nicely overall.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on May 11, 2010 13:55:52 GMT -8
Part of the problem is that the MTA has really evolved over the years in how they dealt with station design and artwork. The Blue Line was built first, and it shows. I actually like the Blue Line stations; they are very practical and built with function in mind. But, they were not very artistic at first and the same is true of the first Red Line stations. Somewhere along the line, the MTA figured out that they could make stations both functional and artistic, and the Hollywood stations are appropriately over-the-top for an entertainment district. The Gold Line does look better than the Blue Line, but under the surface, they're still just light rail stations. With the Expo Line, the problem is not whether USC got special treatment. I think every station deserves a little specialized treatment, and brick is very appropriate for both the campus and the museums on the other side of the track. The problem is whether or not the same amount of care was put into the stations further down the line. If not, then the MTA deserves criticism. For the time being, none of the stations on the Expo Line are finished. If there is a problem, the MTA still has time to fix it.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 11, 2010 14:16:19 GMT -8
The problem is whether or not the same amount of care was put into the stations further down the line. If not, then the MTA deserves criticism. Well put.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 11, 2010 19:59:36 GMT -8
Well, it's been a long time since we did a photo shoot of the Expo Line and I decided to photograph the progress this evening. With the low angle of the sun coming straight along the tracks in the evening, it's hard to take pictures. In fact the LRT operator will have a lot of visibility problems in late afternoon before the sun sets. But I tried my best. We start with a Blue Line train north of Washington heading toward the Pico Station: Current status of tracks at Washington and Flower. Still no tracks across Washington: 23rd St Station has a center platform, south of the crossing. Note the shadows. Also note that protective glass canopies will be installed later: Beautiful black pole in front of the Natural History museum. These poles are throughout on Exposition Boulevard by USC, starting at the trench portal, ending abruptly past the Vermont Station west platform, where embedded tracks end and ballasted tracks begin. There are no poles on Flower Street yet, but they might be black as well. Perhaps they wanted to put black poles in the embedded sections and silver-gray poles in the ballasted sections to match colored concrete and gravel, respectively: More black poles in the Expo Park/USC Station area: And the black poles end abruptly at the Vermont Station west platform: Details of the catenary arms: Farmdale Station area is being graded and ballast walls are being cast: Showing the original Pacific Electric tracks with 1920-something stamped on them at Farmdale: Dorsey High has already given up their land and demolished their buildings and the contractor is already clearing the area for the Farmdale Station west platform. It just shows how eager LAUSD is for this station. The remaining CPUC process is nothing but formality. I ran into a local Black lady who told me that she can't wait to ride the line. The neighborhood is eagerly anticipating the opening of the line, despite the mischaracterization of a few Fix Expo NIMBYs: And here is the very first shot of the full frontal view of the La Brea bridge with the forms and falsework gone: View from the southwest: The landscaping area east of Hauser and west of La Brea. Clint Simmons of Fix Expo lives a couple of blocks east of where this picture is taken. I hope he will enjoy the trains: Curious machines on the La Cienega bridge. I don't know what they are. Elevators?: A Class 1 bike path will be put south of the retaining wall west of La Cienega right here: La Cienega bridge from the north: Graffiti now gone at Jefferson and National: Culver City abutment for the aerial superstructure is now finished. All the columns are finished as well but two of them are still wrapped for curing. I couldn't get a decent shot of the abutment in a hurry: And, here is a negative development: They have taken the Venice/Robertson Station falsework down and they will restart from the scratch. I don't know the reason. I didn't want to photo this backward progress. LOL But here is an old lady trying to negotiate the Venice/Robertson intersection. They will build a pedestrian bridge here: So, the Expo Line is nearing everyday, and we are all excited. I wonder how the NIMBYs feel about it. But who cares, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by trackman on May 11, 2010 22:02:02 GMT -8
The problem is whether or not the same amount of care was put into the stations further down the line. If not, then the MTA deserves criticism. Well put. Agreed, except it is not MTA. It's the Exposition Authority. Right?
|
|
|
Post by darrell on May 12, 2010 6:15:48 GMT -8
Thanks for the update, Gokhan! You captured another milestone - the first catenary arms installed. The La Brea bridge is looking nice from the south.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 12, 2010 8:28:19 GMT -8
Agreed, except it is not MTA. It's the Exposition Authority. Right? For goodness sake guys, why do you make this entirely false claim that stations are being done differently? Stations are exactly the same everywhere. It's only the OCS poles along Exposition by USC and they are not part of the stations. Likewise, the brick-patterned trench walls are not part of the stations, and they are not sound walls or MSE walls found in other parts of the line. It will be interesting to see if they will use black poles from Washington to Jefferson on Flower. My guess is that black poles are being used in embedded-rail sections. We will wait and see. And yes, Expo is responsible but Metro oversees them.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 12, 2010 8:33:57 GMT -8
Thanks for the update, Gokhan! You captured another milestone - the first catenary arms installed. The La Brea bridge is looking nice from the south. Yep, there were quite a few of them in Segment B. They are also placing ties on the La Brea bridge ramps. Another milestone was finishing of the Venice/Robertson abutment. The machines on the La Cienega bridge seem to be another milestone as well but I don't know what they are.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 12, 2010 9:23:06 GMT -8
Excellent pictures as usual, Gőkhan.
I have a question, maybe you (or someone else here) has an answer. Some of the Blue Line stations in Downtown Long Beach have a ramp on one end and steps on the other end, and the steps are used as a secondary entrance.
The question is: is this how 23rd Street Station is going to be? IOW, are the steps at the south end of the station going to be open as a secondary entrance? Or will they be closed off, except as an emergency exit only?
It would be a shame if 23rd/Flower is the only entrance. It is quite a distance from Adams Blvd.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 12, 2010 9:42:34 GMT -8
That would be nice but the problem is that it would make another pedestrian crossing and require CPUC approval and create potential safety hazards. My guess therefore is that it's emergency exit only.
A similar problem happens with the Palms Station. It will be center-platform located to the west of the bridge and the access will be from under the bridge on the west side of National Blvd. It would be nice to have access on the west side of the platform as well for people coming from Motor Ave, but without creating a pedestrian crossing, you would have to design some complicated entrance under the platform there. It's probably still doable.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on May 12, 2010 10:07:00 GMT -8
"The problem is that that would make another pedestrian crossing and require CPUC approval as well as create safety hazards. My guess therefore is that it's emergency exit only."
This would be a real shame. Exits at both ends of a platform can significantly increase the number of destinations within a 5 minute walk of the station, in an area like Palms where the street grid is at an angle to the rail line. In Long Beach many center-platform stations have two exits, but it is a street-running area.
I don't see the safety issue. With a center platform, both ends of the platform see trains at full speed when they are pulling in. With well designed pedestrian gates and fences, there should be no greater danger with two exists than one.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 12, 2010 12:01:05 GMT -8
In the case of 23rd Street Station, the south end of the station is mid-block, and its on a curve. So they would need to add a crosswalk, and probably a traffic light as well.
The station itself is pretty long, and it's kind of far from the destinations on Figueroa south of Adams. Without the other entrance, people coming from those destinations will have to walk north and west to 23rd Street and Flower, and then south again to the platform area. This could lead to lazy/stupid people (like me in my younger days) jumping onto the platform from the street.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 12, 2010 13:37:27 GMT -8
I agree that it's an inconvenience, although not major. The distance from Adams to 23rd is only 0.2 miles.
The only way an entrance at the south side would work was if they left a walkway between the tracks leading to Adams, given that this is a center-platform station. Then no CPUC approval would be required as there is no new pedestrian - train crossing. Access would only be from Adams (in addition to 23rd), and they would have to put fences around the walkway to prevent tresspassing onto the tracks. But Expo is not so good at planning at all and I doubt they've even thought about it. If I and others weren't involved in the Phase 2 design, it would result in much worse station placement. Unfortunately not too many people were involved in the Phase 1 design, as at that time the main focus was just to have the line built as LRT instead of BRT.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 12, 2010 13:54:19 GMT -8
Venice/Robertson Station as of today. There was no work activity whatsoever. Lots of I beams are stacked. They've removed the falsework they put last week for some reason. Perhaps they were only practicing. From the pace of their work, I don't think this station will be finished ahead of schedule and it could fall behind schedule. We will find out if Dr. Ken Alpern was right about the Balfour Beatty Infrastructure Division, who had also built the I-405 new lanes.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on May 12, 2010 14:46:41 GMT -8
This other view of the La Brea bridge with grass there looks MUCH better. I'm not totally happy with it still, but I kind of figured that the landscaping would help. I'm actually kind of excited about seeing the finished product there now.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 12, 2010 16:09:37 GMT -8
Here is the official info on the black poles from the Expo Authority:
"Gokhan, The black OCS poles are being erected from Pardee Way through the Vermont Station as part of the mitigations specified in the FEIS/EIR to reduce visual impacts between Expo Park and USC. All other OCS poles on the new section of the Expo Line are unpainted galvanized steel."
So, they are being installed to make the Exposition Park and USC feel more connected to, rather than separated from, each other. This was the main complaint by President Steven Sample of USC, who claimed that the Expo Line would separate the Exposition Park from USC.
Likewise they used rail embedded in colored concrete on Exposition by USC for the same reason. On top of that, the city wanted to have embedded tracks on Flower. I would prefer ballasted tracks on Exposition by USC so that the ultraurban campus would get a jist of rural feeling.
|
|