|
Post by masonite on Feb 3, 2018 20:54:31 GMT -8
It doesnt hit many white regional destinations, true, but there are other communities in this diverse city. The airport area has one of the highest rates of black employment in the state, Leimert Park and the MLK Mall area are some of the highest concentrations of black businesses, the Inglewood area has some of the biggest black faith based organizations in the state, and the whole corridor is, you guessed, some of the highest density black communities. It is also a corridor with a high degree of transit dependence. Remember that its only going to be able to run 2 car trains and its projected weekday ridership is only projected to be 13k in 2030. Thats probably typical Metro lowballing (the 710 bus alone gets 7k riders a day), but it is not supposed to be another Expo line. That said, it will be an incredibly important line for some communities, and its an important core piece that will be augmented by the Measure M north extension and south extension of the green line to provide a long and crucial north/south line. Let alone the future airport connection. And thats without even talking about the political necessities of Measure R and M. Okay, but none of that really refutes my point. Leimert Park and Downtown Inglewood were both just a small collection of small shops when they were white areas and nothing much has changed now. They weren't regional destinations then and aren't now either and even though it is nice they are included in the rail system, they won't be major generators of ridership no matter who owns those businesses. The airport is the one real destination but this line doesn't actually go to the airport and will require a transfer even when the APM is done years from now. Until the APM is done this line is really going to be a white elephant. Over $2B for 13k riders is over $150k per rider, which is just plain awful for a transit project. Even worse, building this line requires the closure of part of the Green Line for over 2 months, which is going to reduce what is left of the Green Line ridership for a long time as people use the closure to justify a car purchase. As for the transit dependence argument it really holds little water. We've seen the Green Line and the Eastside Gold Line put up terrible ridership figures despite serving transit dependent areas. The Green Line has lost a third of its riders in the last 5 years. Even the Blue Line, despite connecting LA County's two major downtowns has lost over 20% of its ridership. Bottom line is a less than ideal rail line that doesn't connect to job centers won't put up very good ridership numbers even if it is in a transit dependent area. While ultimately connecting this line to the Purple Line may finally make this a viable transit line, that is likely decades away. Until then it is hard to see much of a constituency for this line. Someone going from Inglewood to the LA Civic Center is going to quickly realize it is much faster and more convenient to buy a beater and drive. Hopefully, I am wrong, but I just don't see it.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Feb 3, 2018 21:11:16 GMT -8
Why is limited to only two cars? The Green Line only accommodates 2 car trains. The platforms could be extended for 3 car trains, but it hasn't been necessary. It won't be necessary on Crenshaw either for many many years if ever. Damien Goodmon's Crenshaw Subway Coalition is fighting any development along the line as well.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Feb 4, 2018 10:01:33 GMT -8
It doesnt hit many white regional destinations, true, but there are other communities in this diverse city. The airport area has one of the highest rates of black employment in the state, Leimert Park and the MLK Mall area are some of the highest concentrations of black businesses, the Inglewood area has some of the biggest black faith based organizations in the state, and the whole corridor is, you guessed, some of the highest density black communities. It is also a corridor with a high degree of transit dependence. Remember that its only going to be able to run 2 car trains and its projected weekday ridership is only projected to be 13k in 2030. Thats probably typical Metro lowballing (the 710 bus alone gets 7k riders a day), but it is not supposed to be another Expo line. That said, it will be an incredibly important line for some communities, and its an important core piece that will be augmented by the Measure M north extension and south extension of the green line to provide a long and crucial north/south line. Let alone the future airport connection. And thats without even talking about the political necessities of Measure R and M. Okay, but none of that really refutes my point. Leimert Park and Downtown Inglewood were both just a small collection of small shops when they were white areas and nothing much has changed now. They weren't regional destinations then and aren't now either and even though it is nice they are included in the rail system, they won't be major generators of ridership no matter who owns those businesses. The airport is the one real destination but this line doesn't actually go to the airport and will require a transfer even when the APM is done years from now. Until the APM is done this line is really going to be a white elephant. Over $2B for 13k riders is over $150k per rider, which is just plain awful for a transit project. Even worse, building this line requires the closure of part of the Green Line for over 2 months, which is going to reduce what is left of the Green Line ridership for a long time as people use the closure to justify a car purchase. As for the transit dependence argument it really holds little water. We've seen the Green Line and the Eastside Gold Line put up terrible ridership figures despite serving transit dependent areas. The Green Line has lost a third of its riders in the last 5 years. Even the Blue Line, despite connecting LA County's two major downtowns has lost over 20% of its ridership. Bottom line is a less than ideal rail line that doesn't connect to job centers won't put up very good ridership numbers even if it is in a transit dependent area. While ultimately connecting this line to the Purple Line may finally make this a viable transit line, that is likely decades away. Until then it is hard to see much of a constituency for this line. Someone going from Inglewood to the LA Civic Center is going to quickly realize it is much faster and more convenient to buy a beater and drive. Hopefully, I am wrong, but I just don't see it. Saying that it doesn’t actually go to LAX is a pretty weak point. A good number of green line riders work at LAX and all of them plus new Crenshaw line riders will be going to LAX. It’s a huge destination. An argument could be made that it’s the biggest, single destination in the western United States. Plus it continues from LAX and serves the growing El Segundo job market. I agree that it misses the football stadium by a bit but it’s walkable to the forum. Both of those are regional destinations. Leimert is a destination for black Los Angeles. What I look at to see if people will be riding a new line are not only how it serves destinations, but how is the existing bus ridership. I knew that the gold line through east la was going to be weak for some time because no one was riding the bus where the train was being built. But for Crenshaw the bus ridership is there. It’s going to be pretty popular from the start. But hey. It’s just an opinion like yours. None of us really know. We’ll all have to wait and see. BTW I will likely be a daily rider.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Feb 5, 2018 9:22:30 GMT -8
Okay, but none of that really refutes my point. Leimert Park and Downtown Inglewood were both just a small collection of small shops when they were white areas and nothing much has changed now. They weren't regional destinations then and aren't now either and even though it is nice they are included in the rail system, they won't be major generators of ridership no matter who owns those businesses. The airport is the one real destination but this line doesn't actually go to the airport and will require a transfer even when the APM is done years from now. Until the APM is done this line is really going to be a white elephant. Over $2B for 13k riders is over $150k per rider, which is just plain awful for a transit project. Even worse, building this line requires the closure of part of the Green Line for over 2 months, which is going to reduce what is left of the Green Line ridership for a long time as people use the closure to justify a car purchase. As for the transit dependence argument it really holds little water. We've seen the Green Line and the Eastside Gold Line put up terrible ridership figures despite serving transit dependent areas. The Green Line has lost a third of its riders in the last 5 years. Even the Blue Line, despite connecting LA County's two major downtowns has lost over 20% of its ridership. Bottom line is a less than ideal rail line that doesn't connect to job centers won't put up very good ridership numbers even if it is in a transit dependent area. While ultimately connecting this line to the Purple Line may finally make this a viable transit line, that is likely decades away. Until then it is hard to see much of a constituency for this line. Someone going from Inglewood to the LA Civic Center is going to quickly realize it is much faster and more convenient to buy a beater and drive. Hopefully, I am wrong, but I just don't see it. Saying that it doesn’t actually go to LAX is a pretty weak point. A good number of green line riders work at LAX and all of them plus new Crenshaw line riders will be going to LAX. It’s a huge destination. An argument could be made that it’s the biggest, single destination in the western United States. Plus it continues from LAX and serves the growing El Segundo job market. I agree that it misses the football stadium by a bit but it’s walkable to the forum. Both of those are regional destinations. Leimert is a destination for black Los Angeles. What I look at to see if people will be riding a new line are not only how it serves destinations, but how is the existing bus ridership. I knew that the gold line through east la was going to be weak for some time because no one was riding the bus where the train was being built. But for Crenshaw the bus ridership is there. It’s going to be pretty popular from the start. But hey. It’s just an opinion like yours. None of us really know. We’ll all have to wait and see. BTW I will likely be a daily rider. Well, it really doesn't go the airport. No doubt LAX is a major destination for jobs and travel. However, to get there, you have to go to the Aviation Station and wait for a shuttle that can get bogged down in traffic to and in the airport. That takes quite a bit of time and while some people use it, ridership overall on the Green Line has cratered and is fairly weak. The APM will be a nice addition, but even then it won't be like other cities that have direct service. For example the Blue Line in Chicago goes straight into the terminals in O'Hare and provides a nice one seat ride into Downtown Chicago. Here in LA, someone has to wait for the shuttle and then go to Aviation, then they can take the Crenshaw Line up to Expo, which will take a while and then you have an awkward transfer to Expo and then a long ride on Expo as it is very slow to Downtown. That is going to be well over an hour. Even employees don't necessarily want to spend extra time just to use transit. The Forum is a mile from the Inglewood Station. You may have a handful of people walk that after a concert at night, but not many at all.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Feb 5, 2018 19:57:33 GMT -8
Saying that it doesn’t actually go to LAX is a pretty weak point. A good number of green line riders work at LAX and all of them plus new Crenshaw line riders will be going to LAX. It’s a huge destination. An argument could be made that it’s the biggest, single destination in the western United States. Plus it continues from LAX and serves the growing El Segundo job market. I agree that it misses the football stadium by a bit but it’s walkable to the forum. Both of those are regional destinations. Leimert is a destination for black Los Angeles. What I look at to see if people will be riding a new line are not only how it serves destinations, but how is the existing bus ridership. I knew that the gold line through east la was going to be weak for some time because no one was riding the bus where the train was being built. But for Crenshaw the bus ridership is there. It’s going to be pretty popular from the start. But hey. It’s just an opinion like yours. None of us really know. We’ll all have to wait and see. BTW I will likely be a daily rider. Well, it really doesn't go the airport. No doubt LAX is a major destination for jobs and travel. However, to get there, you have to go to the Aviation Station and wait for a shuttle that can get bogged down in traffic to and in the airport. That takes quite a bit of time and while some people use it, ridership overall on the Green Line has cratered and is fairly weak. The APM will be a nice addition, but even then it won't be like other cities that have direct service. For example the Blue Line in Chicago goes straight into the terminals in O'Hare and provides a nice one seat ride into Downtown Chicago. Here in LA, someone has to wait for the shuttle and then go to Aviation, then they can take the Crenshaw Line up to Expo, which will take a while and then you have an awkward transfer to Expo and then a long ride on Expo as it is very slow to Downtown. That is going to be well over an hour. Even employees don't necessarily want to spend extra time just to use transit. The Forum is a mile from the Inglewood Station. You may have a handful of people walk that after a concert at night, but not many at all. I ride the green line daily and at least 60-70 people exit every train at rush hour in the morning and the same return every evening. Nearly all are employees, especially in the morning. That will go up for sure when the connection is improved. And I really don’t get your point with the Airtrain Connector. It’s going to run every 2 minutes so you get off the green line or Crenshaw line and you’re in LAX in 5 minutes. That’s probably quicker than driving in, parking, and walking to the terminal. If not, then it’s certainly not significantly longer. You’ve driven in before so you know what it can be like.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Feb 6, 2018 15:45:33 GMT -8
The big problem right now facing this line is the out of station transfer at Expo. I can already see the headlines in the newspaper about how Metro screwed up when (not if) a pedestrian is killed run over by cars while trying to cross the street to change to/from Expo line.
Metro needs to start construction on relocating the East bound Crenshaw platform on the Expo line. The fact that they didn't ask for any money and didn't factor this in the Crenshaw budget is going to bite them in the ass.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Feb 6, 2018 17:40:59 GMT -8
Well, it really doesn't go the airport. No doubt LAX is a major destination for jobs and travel. However, to get there, you have to go to the Aviation Station and wait for a shuttle that can get bogged down in traffic to and in the airport. That takes quite a bit of time and while some people use it, ridership overall on the Green Line has cratered and is fairly weak. The APM will be a nice addition, but even then it won't be like other cities that have direct service. For example the Blue Line in Chicago goes straight into the terminals in O'Hare and provides a nice one seat ride into Downtown Chicago. Here in LA, someone has to wait for the shuttle and then go to Aviation, then they can take the Crenshaw Line up to Expo, which will take a while and then you have an awkward transfer to Expo and then a long ride on Expo as it is very slow to Downtown. That is going to be well over an hour. Even employees don't necessarily want to spend extra time just to use transit. The Forum is a mile from the Inglewood Station. You may have a handful of people walk that after a concert at night, but not many at all. I ride the green line daily and at least 60-70 people exit every train at rush hour in the morning and the same return every evening. Nearly all are employees, especially in the morning. That will go up for sure when the connection is improved. And I really don’t get your point with the Airtrain Connector. It’s going to run every 2 minutes so you get off the green line or Crenshaw line and you’re in LAX in 5 minutes. That’s probably quicker than driving in, parking, and walking to the terminal. If not, then it’s certainly not significantly longer. You’ve driven in before so you know what it can be like. No doubt people use it to go to the airport even with the shuttle. I just think it would be a lot higher with a direct connection. Yes, the APM should help a ton, but people are lazy. If they have to transfer that knocks out a few. If they have to walk a ways to the terminal that takes out more. It will still attract some employees, but I doubt many passengers.
|
|
|
Post by bzzzt on Feb 7, 2018 10:39:05 GMT -8
I ride the green line daily and at least 60-70 people exit every train at rush hour in the morning and the same return every evening. Nearly all are employees, especially in the morning. That will go up for sure when the connection is improved. And I really don’t get your point with the Airtrain Connector. It’s going to run every 2 minutes so you get off the green line or Crenshaw line and you’re in LAX in 5 minutes. That’s probably quicker than driving in, parking, and walking to the terminal. If not, then it’s certainly not significantly longer. You’ve driven in before so you know what it can be like. No doubt people use it to go to the airport even with the shuttle. I just think it would be a lot higher with a direct connection. Yes, the APM should help a ton, but people are lazy. If they have to transfer that knocks out a few. If they have to walk a ways to the terminal that takes out more. It will still attract some employees, but I doubt many passengers. As someone who sometimes takes the GL to LAX as a passenger, I can say that from my own experience, it's not the shuttle transfer that really keeps me from using it more. The main reasons I don't always use the GL are: No long-term/cheap parking at stations where I would leave from e.g. Norwalk - have to use Uber/Lyft Cheap parking at hotels and parking lots around LAX Can be inconvenient when leaving as the shuttle takes forever in the loop - I'll walk to T6 to avoid the wait in traffic The APM will avoid the loop traffic, but I still need long-term parking at a station... that isn't going to change. I will also say that the GL and shuttle may get more employees than you guys say... I've taken it at all hours, and even at nights and weekends, there is always a steady stream of LAX employees using it.
|
|
|
Post by numble on Feb 10, 2018 17:51:44 GMT -8
Here is the status of the Crenshaw/LAX Line (as of January 2018): • Overall Project Progress is 75% complete; main line contractor needs to mitigate 20 day delay • Contractor continues critical track work installation along southern area of alignment • Contractor continues concrete wall and roof placements for cut‐and‐cover tunnel and the three underground stations along Crenshaw Boulevard • The contractor for the Southwestern Yard Maintenance Facility is ahead of schedule Projected cost: $2,058M (in line with budget) Projected opening: Oct 2019 (in line with schedule) The remaining cost contingency is below 2% of the total project budget ($38 million in contingency remains). Contractor is 20 days behind schedule and is required to mitigate schedule to maintain planned revenue service in October 2019. Here is the status of the Crenshaw/LAX Line (as of February 2018): metro.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=4e5d2d33-879a-469d-a749-545aab33aab8.pdf• Overall Project Progress is 77% complete; contractor needs to mitigate 40 days schedule delay • Major initial interface effort commenced on January 26, 2018 for the Green Line tie‐in to Crenshaw/LAX Line. Planned closure from January 26 to April 7, 2018 of Green Line at Aviation Station to end of line. • Contractor continues critical track work installation along southern area of alignment • Contractor continues concrete wall and roof placements for cut‐and‐cover tunnel and the three underground stations along Crenshaw Boulevard • The Southwestern Yard Maintenance Facility is progressing ahead of schedule
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Jun 18, 2018 11:45:35 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 19, 2018 15:30:39 GMT -8
^ That was quite a surprise!
The Redondo-to-Expo Crenshaw Line was the plan for a long time.
The new option will essentially make a tiny stub Redondo-to-LAX line. I can't imagine South Bay people will be very happy about that.
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Jun 19, 2018 17:39:08 GMT -8
^ That was quite a surprise! The Redondo-to-Expo Crenshaw Line was the plan for a long time. The new option will essentially make a tiny stub Redondo-to-LAX line. I can't imagine South Bay people will be very happy about that. It’s possible that could change when Crenshaw north and Torrance south extensions open. For now the ridership is very low for the stub end of the green line, it will increase with the Torrance extension, but I imagine ridership surveys indicate very few riders are heading east and few will head north, they’re only going to lax as of now. If in the future there is ridership demand to use it as a north south arterial, metro could always try interlining continual service from Hollywood highland to Torrance with Hollywood highland to norwalk so each branch gets service every ten minutes with five minute headways between Hollywood highland and lax You could have stub service on the green line Norwalk to lax on the alternate five minutes so that you have five minute headways on the green line. But that would still leave ten minute headways on the Torrance line, if you alternated its Hollywood highland service with a service ending at lax you’d also have five minute headways, that would mean a train every 2.5 minutes at aviation 96th with four service patterns, but iirc it does have a three track platform, so shouldn’t be a problem.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jun 21, 2018 18:04:25 GMT -8
I already posted in the Green line thread but I think it is the right decision to run a shuttle service on the low ridership portion spur.
Also something to keep in mind. The Norwalk-LAX ridership will likely be very stable while the LAX-Expo ridership is a bit of an unknown right now. And it could potentially grow significantly if the line is eventually extended to Mid City or Hollywood.
What may eventually happen, as culvercitylocke already pointed out, is that the Hollywood-LAX portion may require more frequency than the Norwalk-LAX portion. If that day comes, the South Bay spur will just continue north to double the LAX-Hollywood frequncy.
|
|
|
Post by cygnip2p on Jun 21, 2018 19:46:01 GMT -8
The issue with the end of the Green Line is that there are eye watering employment numbers down there (Raytheon, Boeing Space, Northrop, Mattel, Marvel, etc, we are talking 6 figures of jobs), but they are increasingly white collar jobs. When the line was initially considered, the area was still home to significant blue collar manufacturing for aerospace and weapons. That has slowly waned, and while the huge half-mile long Northrop plant off Aviation is still cranking out Super Hornet fuselages for now, the order book has been trending down. They were granted a stay of execution when the US Navy bought a big batch due to the F-35s delays, but without international customers, its still reaching end of life.
There is a joke in manufacturing areas that once the strip club closes, you know its over. Well, the Wild Goose closed in 2012ish and was replaced by a mixed use TOD soooooo...
The Redondo Green Line end might actually be more busy with the connection to Expo, that would give it access to more white collar commuters. But in the end, lets be real. Regardless of the route chosen, current Green Line customers to the end of line will have to transfer. And the Norwalk to Expo service pattern will likely serve far more people than the Redondo to Expo route, regardless of how many Expo white collar commuters they can convince to transfer.
If the option of both isnt feasible, than for me, Norwalk to Expo makes more sense.
|
|
|
Post by usmc1401 on Jun 22, 2018 15:28:20 GMT -8
The Wild Goose closed because the land was emminet domained for the green line station. Also one of the owners may have gone to Jail. The F-18 has now been built for about forty years which may be close to a record for length of production of a air frame.
|
|
|
Post by numble on Jul 14, 2018 7:58:43 GMT -8
Here is the status of the Crenshaw/LAX Line (as of July 2018): • Overall Project Progress is 81.8% complete; contractor behind schedule and forecast revenue service date is under review. Contractor is continuing to fall behind schedule and reported potential delays with their latest schedule update. • Contractor continues critical underground structures, track, systems and testing activities • Contractor preparing for removal of street decking and street restoration along Crenshaw Blvd area • The Southwestern Yard Maintenance Facility (Division 16) is one month behind schedule with mitigation plans being developed to ensure completion of the facility by first quarter in 2019. Projected cost: $2,058M (in line with budget) Projected opening: Under Review (used to be Oct 2019) metro.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=6364702&GUID=15E9B6E8-1824-432E-8E0B-578E5BBA349B
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Jul 14, 2018 15:24:05 GMT -8
Who is the contractor on this one again?
|
|
|
Post by numble on Jul 14, 2018 16:58:28 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by numble on Jul 19, 2018 10:11:00 GMT -8
Metro staff has approved an $8 million change order to recover 45 days from the delayed schedule:
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jul 19, 2018 12:47:19 GMT -8
project is still behind schedule for October 2019 opening
|
|
|
Post by numble on Aug 29, 2018 21:34:45 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Aug 30, 2018 13:33:14 GMT -8
That's a significant slip on completion target this late in the project. I wonder what happened? Edit: Read the report, it is contract 991, which is the yard... 7 weeks behind.
The start of revenue service date is October 30, 2019... probably won't happen now until spring of 2020.
|
|
|
Post by numble on Aug 31, 2018 0:52:51 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by numble on Sept 28, 2018 13:28:49 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by numble on Oct 2, 2018 11:44:05 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Oct 10, 2018 10:00:03 GMT -8
The Revenue Service Date (RSD) is forecast for summer of 2020. Man, that sucks. So right now, it looks like - 2020 Crenshaw
- 2021 Regional Connector
- 2023 Purple Line Phase 1
- 2025 Purple Line Phase 2
- 2026 Purple Line Phase 3
Unless/until more 'issues' come up.
|
|
|
Post by numble on Oct 19, 2018 16:30:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by numble on Nov 3, 2018 22:09:42 GMT -8
They have started some testing of trains on the tracks tonight. It is more about getting trains to the new maintenance yard so that they can start doing testing of the maintenance yard. So its not actual systems testing. But the trains arrived via the Green Line and Crenshaw Line tracks.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Nov 5, 2018 14:59:57 GMT -8
A caught a good look at the maintenance yard while landing on runway 24R last week... looks like the exterior of the building is completely finished.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 6, 2018 14:15:16 GMT -8
Those videos appear to show that overhead power lines have not yet been installed. That is surprising/concerning (from a schedule standpoint).
|
|