expo
Junior Member
Posts: 71
|
Post by expo on Dec 16, 2016 10:25:04 GMT -8
GM of LADOT Seleta Reynolds had an AMA on Reddit. Definitely worth a read, she seems to be an ally of transit and active transportation. One thing of particular relevance the this thread was her response when asked about "prioritization" of intersections on Flower on the Expo and Blue lines:
"Yes - lots of questions about this, and I agree. Without dragging you down a rabbit hole of technical definitions and tales of the PUC, I'll say this: we are absolutely into prioritizing trains over private cars. They are the most efficient way to move people through our city. Here's the trick, though, blue line and expo line trains share those tracks and they back up as they are all trying to enter or exit the downtown tunnel. If we prioritize trains over everything else, we might never be able to let people walking cross the streets. The balance is what we're after to get everyone to and from the trains as safely as possible. We have a few new ideas that we'll be testing early next year, like having the signals "talk" to the train operator so that they can time their runs better. We're not giving up!"
My take: I totally get the argument that you can't give full preemption for the section from Washington through Pico due to the heavy train traffic, but what about all the crossings from Western to Washington on Expo? Those should all receive 100% preemption in my opinion. Her answer is a bit cryptic, so I'm curious to see how far those "new ideas" will go. It's also interesting to see that she framed the problems with preemption in terms of inconvenience to pedestrians, not cars.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Dec 16, 2016 11:23:19 GMT -8
GM of LADOT Seleta Reynolds had an AMA on Reddit. Definitely worth a read, she seems to be an ally of transit and active transportation. One thing of particular relevance the this thread was her response when asked about "prioritization" of intersections on Flower on the Expo and Blue lines: "Yes - lots of questions about this, and I agree. Without dragging you down a rabbit hole of technical definitions and tales of the PUC, I'll say this: we are absolutely into prioritizing trains over private cars. They are the most efficient way to move people through our city. Here's the trick, though, blue line and expo line trains share those tracks and they back up as they are all trying to enter or exit the downtown tunnel. If we prioritize trains over everything else, we might never be able to let people walking cross the streets. The balance is what we're after to get everyone to and from the trains as safely as possible. We have a few new ideas that we'll be testing early next year, like having the signals "talk" to the train operator so that they can time their runs better. We're not giving up!" My take: I totally get the argument that you can't give full preemption for the section from Washington through Pico due to the heavy train traffic, but what about all the crossings from Western to Washington on Expo? Those should all receive 100% preemption in my opinion. Her answer is a bit cryptic, so I'm curious to see how far those "new ideas" will go. It's also interesting to see that she framed the problems with preemption in terms of inconvenience to pedestrians, not cars. My understanding is if someone hits the crossing button it really messes up the signaling and pedestrians are the biggest impediment to train priority. If you get a walk signal there needs to be a certain amount of time before the signal can change otherwise you will have people in the middle of an intersection potentially getting run over. That isn't the case with cars. With cars you can have a short signal and then a yellow and you are done.
|
|
|
Post by TransportationZ on Dec 16, 2016 11:36:26 GMT -8
GM of LADOT Seleta Reynolds had an AMA on Reddit. Definitely worth a read, she seems to be an ally of transit and active transportation. One thing of particular relevance the this thread was her response when asked about "prioritization" of intersections on Flower on the Expo and Blue lines: "Yes - lots of questions about this, and I agree. Without dragging you down a rabbit hole of technical definitions and tales of the PUC, I'll say this: we are absolutely into prioritizing trains over private cars. They are the most efficient way to move people through our city. Here's the trick, though, blue line and expo line trains share those tracks and they back up as they are all trying to enter or exit the downtown tunnel. If we prioritize trains over everything else, we might never be able to let people walking cross the streets. The balance is what we're after to get everyone to and from the trains as safely as possible. We have a few new ideas that we'll be testing early next year, like having the signals "talk" to the train operator so that they can time their runs better. We're not giving up!" My take: I totally get the argument that you can't give full preemption for the section from Washington through Pico due to the heavy train traffic, but what about all the crossings from Western to Washington on Expo? Those should all receive 100% preemption in my opinion. Her answer is a bit cryptic, so I'm curious to see how far those "new ideas" will go. It's also interesting to see that she framed the problems with preemption in terms of inconvenience to pedestrians, not cars. First of all, Pico in itself should be upgraded anyway, given how this connects to three major entertainment centers. Here's how I'd do it. Build a second platform for southbound trains. Current Platform becomes NB only. Have a ped bridge complex that connects with eastern side of the tracks, both platforms, and the convention/STAPLES center. Close off the ped crossings crossing the NB tracks.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Dec 18, 2016 17:29:54 GMT -8
First of all, Pico in itself should be upgraded anyway, given how this connects to three major entertainment centers. Here's how I'd do it. Build a second platform for southbound trains. Current Platform becomes NB only. Have a ped bridge complex that connects with eastern side of the tracks, both platforms, and the convention/STAPLES center. Close off the ped crossings crossing the NB tracks. I like the idea of the SB platform and have been saying the same thing for years. It pretty much fits right where you have it if you remove the parking. I'm not so sure about your idea to remove crossings. Do you mean at streets or the ones that access businesses?
|
|
|
Post by exporider on Dec 19, 2016 21:52:12 GMT -8
GM of LADOT Seleta Reynolds had an AMA on Reddit. Definitely worth a read, she seems to be an ally of transit and active transportation. One thing of particular relevance the this thread was her response when asked about "prioritization" of intersections on Flower on the Expo and Blue lines: "Yes - lots of questions about this, and I agree. Without dragging you down a rabbit hole of technical definitions and tales of the PUC, I'll say this: we are absolutely into prioritizing trains over private cars. They are the most efficient way to move people through our city. Here's the trick, though, blue line and expo line trains share those tracks and they back up as they are all trying to enter or exit the downtown tunnel. If we prioritize trains over everything else, we might never be able to let people walking cross the streets. The balance is what we're after to get everyone to and from the trains as safely as possible. We have a few new ideas that we'll be testing early next year, like having the signals "talk" to the train operator so that they can time their runs better. We're not giving up!" My take: I totally get the argument that you can't give full preemption for the section from Washington through Pico due to the heavy train traffic, but what about all the crossings from Western to Washington on Expo? Those should all receive 100% preemption in my opinion. Her answer is a bit cryptic, so I'm curious to see how far those "new ideas" will go. It's also interesting to see that she framed the problems with preemption in terms of inconvenience to pedestrians, not cars. Thanks for posting that, expo. When LADOT hired Seleta I figured that was great news for transit, based on her resume. When she was hired I figured she would prioritize the prioritization. Then I became aware that LADOT doesn't have as much power as I thought, and the real power lies with the City Council who will bend to the whim of their constituencies. I understand her response about the two rail lines getting backed up as they enter the tunnel, a problem that's gotten worse with the enhancement of Expo service to 6-minute headways. From my observations, however, there's not as much of a problem exiting the tunnel. Maybe the solution is to give signal priority to the inbound trains only, and time the outbound trains to leave so that the hit the major signals (Pico and Washington) when the inbound trains have priority.
|
|
|
Post by TransportationZ on Dec 21, 2016 7:26:19 GMT -8
First of all, Pico in itself should be upgraded anyway, given how this connects to three major entertainment centers. Here's how I'd do it. Build a second platform for southbound trains. Current Platform becomes NB only. Have a ped bridge complex that connects with eastern side of the tracks, both platforms, and the convention/STAPLES center. Close off the ped crossings crossing the NB tracks. I like the idea of the SB platform and have been saying the same thing for years. It pretty much fits right where you have it if you remove the parking. I'm not so sure about your idea to remove crossings. Do you mean at streets or the ones that access businesses? No, just the ped crossings at Flower/Pico that cross the tracks. That is why there is an entrance to the ped bridge on the northwestern and southeastern side of the intersection.
|
|
|
Post by joemagruder on Dec 21, 2016 10:14:17 GMT -8
Is Pico and Flower the station where people transfer from the Blue Line to the Expo Line? If so, wouldn't separate platforms make these transfers more difficult, i.e., discourage use?
|
|
|
Post by tramfan on Dec 21, 2016 13:40:03 GMT -8
I always thought that Metro was planning to build a second platform for outbound trains North of the current platform that then would become then a platform for inbound trains; the transfers to and from Blue and Expo would only cross the tracks (already secured by lights, bells and then possibly gates) not the road.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Dec 21, 2016 17:17:17 GMT -8
The cheapest way to fix Pico station is to add another parallel platform which will require taking a lane from Flower Street. But this will only address the capacity issue and won't address the train congestion problem nor the pedestrian safety issue.
The best way to fix Pico station is obviously put it underground so trains don't have to wait for the red light at 12th street and at Pico Blvd.
|
|
expo
Junior Member
Posts: 71
|
Post by expo on Dec 21, 2016 17:54:28 GMT -8
I wonder if that's something Metro ever has or is considering? It would obviously be very expensive, in the hundreds of millions. That's a lot of money, but after the passage of Measure M it doesn't seem unreasonable that Metro could find that money somewhere in its budget.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Dec 21, 2016 21:25:28 GMT -8
The cheapest way to fix Pico station is to add another parallel platform which will require taking a lane from Flower Street. But this will only address the capacity issue and won't address the train congestion problem nor the pedestrian safety issue. The best way to fix Pico station is obviously put it underground so trains don't have to wait for the red light at 12th street and at Pico Blvd. I really doubt they would do that because riders would be required to either access the platform from the street/crosswalk or they'd access it from the sidewalk on flower and cross not just one but two sets of tracks. Either way there's the potential that for busy periods (Pico can get busy during special events) riders would be in an unsafe position trying to access a crowded platform.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Dec 22, 2016 18:38:49 GMT -8
For most stations, splitting NB from SB across Pico would make sense. But Pico is a transfer station, so I think that's no-go.
I have also thought they could remove the sidewalk from the east side of Flower. But the businesses on that side of the street wouldn't like that too much.
Honestly, I think the best answer is to remove one lane of traffic, and use that space add a second platform west of the tracks. Then have steps/ramps leading directly from each platform to both Pico and 12th Street (not crossing over the sidewalk like they do now.)
Or they could widen the center platform and create underground ped tunnels to the west side of Flower.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Dec 28, 2016 17:24:29 GMT -8
The cheapest way to fix Pico station is to add another parallel platform which will require taking a lane from Flower Street. But this will only address the capacity issue and won't address the train congestion problem nor the pedestrian safety issue. The best way to fix Pico station is obviously put it underground so trains don't have to wait for the red light at 12th street and at Pico Blvd. I really doubt they would do that because riders would be required to either access the platform from the street/crosswalk or they'd access it from the sidewalk on flower and cross not just one but two sets of tracks. Either way there's the potential that for busy periods (Pico can get busy during special events) riders would be in an unsafe position trying to access a crowded platform. Is Pico and Flower the station where people transfer from the Blue Line to the Expo Line? If so, wouldn't separate platforms make these transfers more difficult, i.e., discourage use? Trains have the ability to open doors on both sides of the train at the same time for a condition like this, this is present on the Expo Line Downtown Santa Monica Station. One side of doors open and then the next door. So this can be done safely and effectively to enable this transfer. If you ever travel to Atlanta and ride the MARTA train at the Five Points Station there are 2 platforms for each direction of trains at each level and each line and they have this arrangement to facilitate transfers like this. In the longer term the most effective means given the development opportunity may have Metro purchase that block so that they not only own the sidewalk to then build the platform but that platform can be integrated into a new development. Below is an example of Calgary's C-Train's Centre Street Station which is integrated into their Downtown Telus Convention Center/Hotel and related street scape effectively. A similar development and case can be made for Metro here to build a platform and joint development right next to LA Live/Staples Center and Convention Center.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Dec 29, 2016 11:03:41 GMT -8
^ that Calgary photo really clarifies things... If Metro can get its hand on the property to the east of Pico Station, it would really help with expanding the station capacity.
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on Dec 29, 2016 23:33:47 GMT -8
I rode the Expo Line to Santa Monica from DTLA, Wednesday, 28 Dec 2016, around 2:30 p.m. What in hell is going on with the patrons? On the way to Santa Monica, a schizo got on at Vernon Station, took his shirt off, started popping the scabs on his rib cage, and then wiped the blood from the scabs onto the seat. Then he walked into the front half of the LRV, where he proceeded to have a great conversation with himself on how he could take anybody. On the way back from Santa Monica to DTLA around 5 p.m., a guy got on blaring a speaker from his backpack. Another person got on that wreaked of marijuana and kept dropping his lighter. Where were the police? I expect to see things like this on the Blue Line, but the Expo Line, really? I'm not saying anyone should be denied access, but what a messy trip that was!
|
|
|
Post by mattapoisett on Dec 30, 2016 0:39:08 GMT -8
Welcome to a society which doesn't take mental illness, poverty, & homelessness seriously. Where were the police? I expect to see things like this on the Blue Line, but the Expo Line, really? I'm not saying anyone should be denied access, but what a messy trip that was!
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Dec 30, 2016 1:54:19 GMT -8
My take on the "winos and weirdos" problem is that the "powers that be" travel in their own cars, government cars, or if they're high enough on the political ladder, chauffeur-driven limos. They don't have to put up with nut cases turning our trains into monkey cages. Ideally, people who can't behave in a reasonably civilized manner SHOULD be denied access. People can be poor and still act like they've had a proper upbringing. Like I have said several times before, if we really wanted to attract more riders, Metro would bring a company of Singapore police personnel over to enforce Singapore standards. The ACLU and the various "homeless advocates" would probably scream to high heaven, but decent, law abiding citizens would feel safe and comfortable on our trains and buses. Time to bring back state hospitals with locked wards.
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Dec 30, 2016 6:50:28 GMT -8
Here in Berlin, it's happened several times that I have been on the U-Bahn (subway) where someone comes on the train to sleep. Within about 4 stops a team of 2 or 3 big dudes in yellow jackets come on and carry them off the train. They have been putting cameras everywhere over the past year and, evidently, watch them pretty carefully.
It's not all wine and roses here, but if someone is obviously breaking the rules, the police enforce. I get the impression that US cops are compelled do the bare minimum to avoid the legal nightmare of punitive damage claims for millions. In Europe, making extra money from a lawsuit is not possible and attempts would be laughed out of court—is it possible that's a big reason for the difference?
|
|
|
Post by mattapoisett on Dec 30, 2016 11:41:30 GMT -8
.....I get the impression that US cops are compelled do the bare minimum to avoid the legal nightmare of punitive damage claims for millions. In Europe, making extra money from a lawsuit is not possible and attempts would be laughed out of court—is it possible that's a big reason for the difference? I wouldn't think so. Here in the United States the cops are responsible for much more than they are elsewhere. Not only investigating and fighting crime but they are here to clean up the messes left by lack of a safety net. (However this doesn't excuse some of the egregious behavior of some cops over the years) Let's take the guy on the train for example. He was underserved by a lack of a good education. It's obvious that he is mentally unstable. Which is exacerbated by his lack of access to real healthcare, both physical and mental, not to mention he's likely homeless. The cops can arrest and hold him, but to what end? Is there any way the cops can get him real services to put him on a path to become a productive member of society? Not likely. Eventually he'll be back on the streets where he'll just annoying more passengers on the metro. The circle of his life will continue, likely in a downward spiral, until he passes.
|
|
|
Post by mattapoisett on Dec 30, 2016 12:04:43 GMT -8
.........Metro would bring a company of Singapore police personnel over to enforce Singapore standards. The ACLU and the various "homeless advocates" would probably scream to high heaven, but decent, law abiding citizens would feel safe and comfortable on our trains and buses. Time to bring back state hospitals with locked wards. You really want to go back to a time of locked wards? Really? If you ever have the chance please watch a film called it Titicut Follies. It was banned by the state of Massachusetts for 24 years because it showed the reality of what happened behind those locked doors. In regards to Singapore, you may find it better to live in a place without due process, where you can be picked up & detained to virtually an unlimited amount of time without cause or judicial review. (According to Human Rights Watch) However, if you happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, you could be in big trouble without having done anything, with no way out.
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on Dec 30, 2016 12:16:05 GMT -8
There's folks on the board that believe America has too much freedom? ...and are willing to give that up for a more aggressive totalitarian police state. I think there has to be a more proper balance than offloading the lack of a social safety net to the police and jails. We could treat people like human beings with dignity and respect—the way we all want to be treated or the way we want our loved ones to be treated by investing in proper services (ahem, Prop HHH passed and will be enacted) and maybe organize society our society in LA to treat these people who need help as help who need help and not as outsiders or undesirables. This is a social issue IMHO, not a policing issue. There probably needs to be a campaign to tell people what they should do when the an unstable person is in need of assistance that untrained Metro Rail patrons can't help with. Just sayin'
|
|
|
Post by usmc1401 on Dec 30, 2016 12:59:01 GMT -8
You can not say this gentleman was under served by a lack of education. One person I have known for over thirty years who has been on the street has a degree in architecture and has worked for large firms just will hit the streets for a period of time. The wires just shorted in his head in his mid to late twenty's.
|
|
|
Post by mattapoisett on Dec 30, 2016 13:37:48 GMT -8
You can not say this gentleman was under served by a lack of education. One person I have known for over thirty years who has been on the street has a degree in architecture and has worked for large firms just will hit the streets for a period of time. The wires just shorted in his head in his mid to late twenty's. I live in South LA and my wife grew up deep in Historic South Central LA during the 80's we can point to many for whom poverty and a lack of a good education did them in, including our current neighbors who are about to lose their house.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jan 3, 2017 13:36:56 GMT -8
Not everything is a political problem with no solutions. The transient problem on Metro is ultimately a problem of split jurisdictions and low level of staffing.
I'm not saying there should be uniformed police officer on all the trains but having them around in every 3 or 4 stations would be a good start so they can respond to incidents within a few minutes.
And Metro should allow local police to enter stations and board the trains to arrest people rather than having the local PD call LA Sheriff for backup.
|
|
|
Post by bzzzt on Jan 3, 2017 14:14:45 GMT -8
I have seen hardly any cops doing ticket checks since about when they started discussing redoing the patrol contract (this is on the gold line).
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on Jan 3, 2017 15:52:35 GMT -8
I have seen hardly any cops doing ticket checks since about when they started discussing redoing the patrol contract (this is on the gold line). I exit 7th St/Metro Center every morning at around 8am and encounter at least two fare inspectors or Sheriffs, this morning, there was 8 to 10 fanned across the fare gate area to check TAP cards. Sometimes when you enter the station in the early evening they inspect your TAP card AFTER they watch you enter through the locked turnstiles. This is the only station I've seen this kind of full court press, I could ride the whole Expo route and not see another security figure until DTSM. This could be about staffing unmanned stations that see newbies fumble and cause long lines at TVMs, vandalism, broken fare gates, fare evasion, turned off escalators, and transients that take up residence in underground stations--I wish this conversation was about that because I've mentioned that the millions in savings from lapsing the Sheriff contract for LAPD, etc could be used for permanent staff at the stations, and they would be creating some local jobs to help the local economy. Also, how backwards is the installation of the grant funded security booths at many stations? They look like station agent offices, but they are most often completely empty and the security staff is useless because they don't know how to use the system, fare structure, or even carry maps.
|
|
|
Post by bzzzt on Jan 4, 2017 0:45:46 GMT -8
There sure are a lot of Metro security guards around, though. Looks like they're armed with something - tasers, I would guess.
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Jan 4, 2017 21:43:53 GMT -8
I'm really glad they snuck that in during the lame duck, now if we could also get in the next few days the phase three acceleration grant they applied for
Edit: thought this was in the purple line construction thread
|
|
|
Post by davebowman on Jan 6, 2017 17:09:23 GMT -8
I have been commuting on the Expo Line for about 6 1/2 months now, and I would say during that time there have been about four or five times when there was someone in my car who made me very nervous because of their ranting or overall weirdness. It seems that the first few weeks after Phase 2 opened there were regular TAP card checks on the trains by LA County sheriff's deputies, but I can't remember the last time I saw a law enforcement person on a train or at a station. I have no confidence that in the event of an emergency a police officer or deputy would show up in time to prevent a serious crime. I think Metro will find out sooner or later that they're going to have to invest some money in law enforcement--perhaps a separate entity like NYC's transit police--to give people confidence that they will be safe taking mass transit in LA.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jan 6, 2017 17:47:39 GMT -8
I have been commuting on the Expo Line for about 6 1/2 months now, and I would say during that time there have been about four or five times when there was someone in my car who made me very nervous because of their ranting or overall weirdness. It seems that the first few weeks after Phase 2 opened there were regular TAP card checks on the trains by LA County sheriff's deputies, but I can't remember the last time I saw a law enforcement person on a train or at a station. I have no confidence that in the event of an emergency a police officer or deputy would show up in time to prevent a serious crime. I think Metro will find out sooner or later that they're going to have to invest some money in law enforcement--perhaps a separate entity like NYC's transit police--to give people confidence that they will be safe taking mass transit in LA. Good timing. There was a link to a news article regarding that very subject today. The short version is that many more fare inspectors and police are coming soon. The Source
|
|