|
Post by bzcat on Nov 9, 2010 11:24:34 GMT -8
Even with the slow poke 46 minute estimate, it is still a lot faster than driving from Santa Monica to Downtown during rush hour.
There is certain buzz building on the Westside about Expo. I had 2 different coworkers came up to me last week and asked about that "train thingy" they are building in Culver City. And even my wife, who is rather indifferent about transit mentioned to me the other night (while we were stuck in traffic on the 110 in Downtown, trying to get to Hollywood): "When that Expo train is done, we can take it to Downtown (we live near Culver City) and catch the subway to Hollywood... right? It sure beats driving there..."
I had tears in my eyes... People are starting to get it... Expo is going to change lives on the Westside. Next June cannot come soon enough.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 9, 2010 11:31:53 GMT -8
Even with the slow poke 46 minute estimate, it is still a lot faster than driving from Santa Monica to Downtown during rush hour. There is certain buzz building on the Westside about Expo. I had 2 different coworkers came up to me last week and asked about that "train thingy" they are building in Culver City. And even my wife, who is rather indifferent about transit mentioned to me the other night (while we were stuck in traffic on the 110 in Downtown, trying to get to Hollywood): "When that Expo train is done, we can take it to Downtown (we live near Culver City) and catch the subway to Hollywood... right? It sure beats driving there..." I had tears in my eyes... People are starting to get it... Expo is going to change lives on the Westside. Next June cannot come soon enough. What about taking the train v. driving outside of rush hour? We don't need the train to be marginally better than driving just during rush hour.....it has to be a competitive alternative to all modes of traveling at all times. If we're building a train line, make it have priority.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 9, 2010 11:33:37 GMT -8
Even with the slow poke 46 minute estimate, it is still a lot faster than driving from Santa Monica to Downtown during rush hour. There is certain buzz building on the Westside about Expo. I had 2 different coworkers came up to me last week and asked about that "train thingy" they are building in Culver City. And even my wife, who is rather indifferent about transit mentioned to me the other night (while we were stuck in traffic on the 110 in Downtown, trying to get to Hollywood): "When that Expo train is done, we can take it to Downtown (we live near Culver City) and catch the subway to Hollywood... right? It sure beats driving there..." I had tears in my eyes... People are starting to get it... Expo is going to change lives on the Westside. Next June cannot come soon enough. If only there were more Expo Lines... In fact, we will see many lines with the Measure R and 30/10. It's just idiotic to force everybody to drive on the freeways and major arterials in a Metropolitan city like Los Angeles. The city desperately needs rail transit. And it's happening now to a good extent. It will make the city more livable. The more rail lines are built the better it will be. People are now realizing the obvious.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 9, 2010 13:18:11 GMT -8
Summary of the Expo Board Meeting yesterday:
Item 6.a Small Business Enterprise Program was deferred to the next meeting.
The action on Item 6.b was to obtain Inspector General and Ethics Officer services from Metro.
Items 6.c through 6.k passed as presented.
The discussion of opening dates and segments was postponed as the Finding of No Significant Impact on the addition of the station at Farmdale has yet to be received from the Federal Transit Administration, preventing the final design and construction of that station to be factored into the discussion.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Nov 9, 2010 14:45:08 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 9, 2010 15:17:18 GMT -8
^^ The curbed article states: Originally budgeted at $345 million, the train line will pencil out to about $895 million because of unforeseen construction and engineering work, as well as a new station at Farmdale Avenue. When was this project budgeted at $345 million?
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 9, 2010 15:19:43 GMT -8
^^ The curbed article states: Originally budgeted at $345 million, the train line will pencil out to about $895 million because of unforeseen construction and engineering work, as well as a new station at Farmdale Avenue. When was this project budgeted at $345 million? Curbed article is incorrect reporting. The LA times article it sites says "$345 million cost increase"...not originally budgeted at $345 million. It's this type of inaccurate reporting that riles people up!
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 9, 2010 15:19:56 GMT -8
I think there will be little change from what was then (a part-time Ethics Officer from Metro) vs. now (a full-time Ethics Office and Inspector General from Metro). Regarding delays two important things should be pointed out: (1) Currently the biggest source of delay is the Farmdale Station, which still hasn't been approved by FTA. The design of the station cannot start before this approval, let alone the construction. The Farmdale issue was something that was completely out of the control of the Expo Authority and they can't take the blame for that. (2) Venice/Robertson was never part of the original project. The original project called for a station at Wesley St, which would have been built by now along with the rest of the project (except for the Farmdale Station, which was an add-on). Venice/Robertson was a change to the project and people should not expect it to open along with the rest of the project. Despite being somewhat overbudget, do not forget that the Expo Line is still costing 3.5 times cheaper per mile than the Westside Subway.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 9, 2010 15:25:43 GMT -8
^^ The curbed article states: Originally budgeted at $345 million, the train line will pencil out to about $895 million because of unforeseen construction and engineering work, as well as a new station at Farmdale Avenue. When was this project budgeted at $345 million? Curbed article is incorrect reporting. The LA times article it sites says "$345 million cost increase"...not originally budgeted at $345 million. It's this type of inaccurate reporting that riles people up! And even that figure is incorrect. The project was originally budgeted at about $700 million and now we are looking at $900 million. About $100 million of that goes to the Venice/Robertson Station, which was an add-on, and the recent safety add-ons. If the cost increases are a big issue for Mark Ridley-Thomas, he should audit the Crenshaw Line. The cost of that project is now approaching $2 billion now. It was supposed to cost half that.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 9, 2010 15:35:18 GMT -8
^^ The curbed article states: Originally budgeted at $345 million, the train line will pencil out to about $895 million because of unforeseen construction and engineering work, as well as a new station at Farmdale Avenue. When was this project budgeted at $345 million? Curbed article is incorrect reporting. The LA times article it sites says "$345 million cost increase"...not originally budgeted at $345 million. It's this type of inaccurate reporting that riles people up! Thanks. The comments had not yet shown up on my screen. This was a major SNAFU on the part of the article's writer. The Record of Decision from 2006 listed a budget of $640,000,000 in YOE dollars. $345 million is the amount of the increase over the budgeted cost. As many have pointed out in the comments, this was largely due to addition of the USC trench and the Venice/Robertson, Trousdale and Farmdale stations. There were also some cost overruns. I have commented that the article's author needs to fix this.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Nov 9, 2010 15:36:38 GMT -8
Despite being somewhat overbudget, do not forget that the Expo Line is still costing 3.5 times cheaper per mile than the Westside Subway. Let's keep the constant comparisons of Westside subway to Expo Line at a minimal....otherwise, we all get riled up about what's better or not. Damn you Curbed!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 9, 2010 15:50:58 GMT -8
Curbed article is now fixed.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 9, 2010 16:00:09 GMT -8
The Record of Decision from 2006 listed a budget of $640,000,000 in YOE dollars. $345 million is the amount of the increase over the budgeted cost. 899 - 640 = 259, not 345
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 9, 2010 16:08:59 GMT -8
The Record of Decision from 2006 listed a budget of $640,000,000 in YOE dollars. $345 million is the amount of the increase over the budgeted cost. 899 - 640 = 259, not 345 Yep, the LA Times article is incorrect as well. I have requested a citation for that number.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 9, 2010 16:19:19 GMT -8
Yep, the LA Times article is incorrect as well. I have requested a citation for that number. Yep, it's all maligning -- what the press is best about... If the number came from MRT, he is excelling at maligning, too.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 9, 2010 16:36:22 GMT -8
This whole Expo cost-increase thing reminds me the false news of the Obama trip to India costing tax payers $200 million a day, along with other maligning of the spending by the Obama government.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Nov 9, 2010 16:40:06 GMT -8
Even with the slow poke 46 minute estimate, it is still a lot faster than driving from Santa Monica to Downtown during rush hour. There is certain buzz building on the Westside about Expo. I had 2 different coworkers came up to me last week and asked about that "train thingy" they are building in Culver City. And even my wife, who is rather indifferent about transit mentioned to me the other night (while we were stuck in traffic on the 110 in Downtown, trying to get to Hollywood): "When that Expo train is done, we can take it to Downtown (we live near Culver City) and catch the subway to Hollywood... right? It sure beats driving there..." I had tears in my eyes... People are starting to get it... Expo is going to change lives on the Westside. Next June cannot come soon enough. What about taking the train v. driving outside of rush hour? We don't need the train to be marginally better than driving just during rush hour.....it has to be a competitive alternative to all modes of traveling at all times. If we're building a train line, make it have priority. It this a rhetorical question? ;D 46 minutes is indeed about the same as driving from Santa Monica to Downtown LA during off-peak hours. But anyone who spends regular time on the 10 freeway knows that "off-peak" is really the wee hours of the night. The 10 freeway between East LA Interchange to 4th St Santa Monica is pretty much gridlocked from 6 AM to 10 PM in both directions.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Nov 9, 2010 16:41:13 GMT -8
The Metro Board voted on 11/29/07 (item 6A) for additional funding (from $663.3 million to $808.3 million) to cover construction cost inflation for phase 1, and an additional $50 million in Prop. 1B bond funding (item 8) to move the ultimate Culver City aerial station between Washington and Venice Boulevards into phase 1. ADDED: Here's yesterday's Expo board agenda item with details about the updated budget.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 9, 2010 16:47:59 GMT -8
The Metro Board voted on 11/29/07 (item 6A) for additional funding (from $663.3 million to $808.3 million) to cover construction cost inflation for phase 1, and an additional $50 million in Prop. 1B bond funding (item 8) to move the ultimate Culver City aerial station between Washington and Venice Boulevards into phase 1. Great, more details...thanks Darrell!
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 9, 2010 16:53:23 GMT -8
The Metro Board voted on 11/29/07 (item 6A) for additional funding (from $663.3 million to $808.3 million) to cover construction cost inflation for phase 1, and an additional $50 million in Prop. 1B bond funding (item 8) to move the ultimate Culver City aerial station between Washington and Venice Boulevards into phase 1. And part of it was due to unanticipated problems, such as due to the poor soil conditions by USC. So, again, the cost increase is only about $100 million, and this $100 million is mostly due to the economic bubble burst around that time and a somewhat inefficient and greedy contractor (named Flatiron). The more important question right now is the cost of Phase 2. Overall Phase 2 is a smaller project than Phase 1, with less grade separation, fewer elevated stations, and shorter track. The only unusual cost in Phase 2 is the acquisition of the Verizon property for the Expo maintenance facility, which will cost around $100 million. Therefore, if it ends up costing more than about $1.0 - $1.1 billion, it's probably costing more than it should, especially in today's highly competitive construction market.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 9, 2010 18:55:49 GMT -8
I've noticed that the lighting fixtures have now been installed at the stations. They are floodlights aimed at the platform.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Saunders on Nov 9, 2010 19:55:08 GMT -8
This whole Expo cost-increase thing reminds me the false news of the Obama trip to India costing tax payers $200 million a day, along with other maligning of the spending by the Obama government. Oh, god, as if other presidents don't travel. You know last week you posted some bs about Obama and stimulous spending too. I started to compose a retort (recession started under Bush's watch & stimulous appears to be working) then decided that was not what these boards are about and opted to not post my thoughts. However, if this going to be a regular thing for you Gokhan you know I would be happy to post long back and forth threads with you on why Democrats RULE and Republicans DROOL. We can go back and forth until everyone has completely forgot, what these boards about , oh yeah TRANSPORTATION IN LOS ANGELES. Cheers :*)
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Nov 9, 2010 20:10:35 GMT -8
Moderators on some of the other rail-related discussion boards sometimes have to "crack the whip" when members "wander off the trail" into the land of political diatribe. Discussions of the faults and/or virtues of current or previous administrations in Washington DC is usually outside the scope of our place in cyberspace.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 9, 2010 20:23:45 GMT -8
This whole Expo cost-increase thing reminds me the false news of the Obama trip to India costing tax payers $200 million a day, along with other maligning of the spending by the Obama government. Oh, god, as if other presidents don't travel. You know last week you posted some bs about Obama and stimulous spending too. I started to compose a retort (recession started under Bush's watch & stimulous appears to be working) then decided that was not what these boards are about and opted to not post my thoughts. However, if this going to be a regular thing for you Gokhan you know I would be happy to post long back and forth threads with you on why Democrats RULE and Republicans DROOL. We can go back and forth until everyone has completely forgot, what these boards about , oh yeah TRANSPORTATION IN LOS ANGELES. Cheers :*) Not sure what this is about, Jason. First of all I was pointing out that the news about $200 million per day were false, not the other way around. You seem to have read it backward. Second, I do not post regularly about politics on this board, and when people started defaming Republicans in another thread, I asked them not to do so so that no one gets offended. I even pointed out that at a local level, we had a good share of evil Democrats (Alan Robbins) that grossly hurt public transit, despite Republicans being less transit-friendly in general. What I posted before was under the Federal-funding topic, and the politics was relevant in that case. What I posted here was about spending and false news and it had a very good analogy with the Obama trip to India. So, it was relevant. It wasn't even meant to be really political. Again, I don't know what this is about.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Saunders on Nov 10, 2010 9:53:04 GMT -8
Oh, god, as if other presidents don't travel. You know last week you posted some bs about Obama and stimulous spending too. I started to compose a retort (recession started under Bush's watch & stimulous appears to be working) then decided that was not what these boards are about and opted to not post my thoughts. However, if this going to be a regular thing for you Gokhan you know I would be happy to post long back and forth threads with you on why Democrats RULE and Republicans DROOL. We can go back and forth until everyone has completely forgot, what these boards about , oh yeah TRANSPORTATION IN LOS ANGELES. Cheers :*) Not sure what this is about, Jason. First of all I was pointing out that the news about $200 million per day were false, not the other way around. You seem to have read it backward. Second, I do not post regularly about politics on this board, and when people started defaming Republicans in another thread, I asked them not to do so so that no one gets offended. I even pointed out that at a local level, we had a good share of evil Democrats (Alan Robbins) that grossly hurt public transit, despite Republicans being less transit-friendly in general. What I posted before was under the Federal-funding topic, and the politics was relevant in that case. What I posted here was about spending and false news and it had a very good analogy with the Obama trip to India. So, it was relevant. It wasn't even meant to be really political. Again, I don't know what this is about. I'm sorry Gokhan, I totally misread that. That's what I get for firing off quick post while juggling multiple task. In the future, I'll be more on it. Keep up the good work.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 10, 2010 10:24:06 GMT -8
I'm sorry Gokhan, I totally misread that. That's what I get for firing off quick post while juggling multiple task. In the future, I'll be more on it. Keep up the good work. No problem. Politics can be a touchy subject for many, and even if you say something positive, it could be taken the wrong way, as happened here. Therefore, it's a good idea to avoid getting into politics on this discussion board and in other sensitive contexts.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 10, 2010 10:26:08 GMT -8
Here is the budget timeline: - The original budget was $640 million in February 2006, per the FTA Record of Decision.
- The budget was increased to $663 million in August 2007. This included adding the Trousdale (USC/Expo) station, plus crossing improvements and Blue Line tie-in.
- The budget was increased to $808 million in November 2007, as Darrell pointed out, largely to cover inflation in construction costs.
- The budget was increased to $862 million in November 2008 to include $54 million in Prop 1B funds for the Venice/Robertson aerial structure.
- The budget was increased to $899 million in July 2010 for "safety improvements" (including Farmdale station) totalling $36.5 million.
While searching the archives, I found a couple other interesting things. - The Figueroa trench structure was budgeted at $37 million in June 2007.
- The alternative designs near USC are described here.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 10, 2010 10:30:28 GMT -8
The Figueroa trench structure was budgeted at $37 million in June 2007. I remember shortly after the price tag of the trench climbed to $54 million or so. And the Expo Park/USC Station was another add-on later, priced around $10 million.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 10, 2010 10:51:55 GMT -8
The following is an early design concept of the station at Trousdale (Expo Park/USC), from April 2007.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 10, 2010 10:54:54 GMT -8
The following is an early design of the station at Trousdale (Expo Park/USC), from April 2007. Wow, I love that at-grade station with the palm trees, ballasted tracks, and traditional canopies. Note that this station is not the Trousdale trench station that was finally built but a fully at-grade station under the original Hill St LPA.
|
|