|
|
Post by bzcat on Aug 26, 2020 9:35:01 GMT -8
Not 80% complete. Shocker.
The operating plan is no surprise... too much inertia to change from A to B, despite B having higher ridership. But A is not bad - there is value in having a simple easy to understand N-S & E-W network setup.
The operating plan does point out something painfully obvious... it will be nearly impossible to stick to the 3 minute headway in DTLA portion because traffic delays on Expo and Blue line segments. Metro (and advocates) need to place a higher priority on grade separation of Expo and Blue line tracks on Jefferson, Flower and Washington.
|
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Aug 27, 2020 12:54:51 GMT -8
I am surprised but not surprised here and this is a disturbing trend with the Metro Board of Directors/Agency operating rail routes that will cost more in the long run. The number in the report that has me concerned in the report is that like the Crenshaw/Green Line route selection they are selecting the more expensive option even though the other alternative makes better sense from a customer service and operational efficiency perspective. In Page 11 of the PPT where there is a chart with the annual revenue car hours. That difference in revenue car hours will add up when these lines are extended to Montclair and Whittier respectively where this number becomes a larger financial and operational drain to the system. Couple that with the fact that the one way vehicle trip of the Long Beach to Azusa line is close to 50 miles and takes close to 2 hours to make! I am worried about the maintenance and reliability of our LRVs and operators! The Crenshaw Green Line example they had an option where Metro could run a predominate North-South (Expo to South Bay) and East-West (LAX to Norwalk) with trips transferring at the two LAX stations. This was for more cost effective and reduced operational headaches due to the ease of the alignment and length of the trips. Yet staff selected the L shaped route the over time will cost more operate and yet because of the political nature of the board South Bay didn't like it and now Metro has to spend even MORE to operate the line. |
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Aug 27, 2020 12:58:39 GMT -8
Not 80% complete. Shocker. The operating plan is no surprise... too much inertia to change from A to B, despite B having higher ridership. But A is not bad - there is value in having a simple easy to understand N-S & E-W network setup. The operating plan does point out something painfully obvious... it will be nearly impossible to stick to the 3 minute headway in DTLA portion because traffic delays on Expo and Blue line segments. Metro (and advocates) need to place a higher priority on grade separation of Expo and Blue line tracks on Jefferson, Flower and Washington. That and or tell LADOT to stop pussyfooting around and truly put "Transit First" and give the trains the full priority on Flower Street and Washington Blvd. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Sept 16, 2020 23:02:11 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by John Ryan on Sept 17, 2020 11:05:51 GMT -8
Will anyone ever be held accountable for this horrendous project management?
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 21, 2020 17:27:23 GMT -8
Will anyone ever be held accountable for this horrendous project management? It's up to the metro board to hold someone accountable and I've never seen the board show that type of backbone. It's very different watching videos of LA Metro and NYCT/MTA board meetings. The NY MTA board holds everyone accountable and meetings can be contentious. The only time that I've seen similar sentiments from metro's board is when some board member is raising some issue that impacts their constituency outside of metro. In my opinion it's the board that's failing us just as much or more than the project management. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Oct 13, 2020 12:37:29 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Oct 29, 2020 9:07:50 GMT -8
September 2020 status report for Regional Connector. 70.1% complete, but contractor added another 1.5 month delay to completion.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Dec 10, 2020 12:54:35 GMT -8
Regional Connector October 2020 status report:
71.1% - The report has removed comments on the estimated completion date and target critical path. It seems unlikely to me that the previous target mid-2022 completion date could be reached if they are only a bit more than two-thirds complete...
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Dec 22, 2020 10:47:21 GMT -8
Metro staff told the FTA that they reached a "completion incentive agreement" with the contractor that would lead to the delivery of the project earlier than the current contract date of 4/1/22, but it requires Metro board approval (I guess if the Metro board needs to approve it, it might mean paying the contractor more?)
The November 2020 status report also came out. It is 72% complete (+0.9%) as of the end of November.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Jan 16, 2021 12:02:15 GMT -8
Metro staff is recommending paying the Regional Connector contractor an extra $13 million to complete the project 10 weeks ahead of the current schedule. Staff estimates that this actually saves $6 million because a later completion would cost $19 million in various costs such as bus shuttle operations, paying 2.5 months of rent for construction offices, oversight staff and consultants.
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jan 25, 2021 7:19:15 GMT -8
January " Major Project Status Report" is out. Regional Connector project stands at 72.5% complete. They've got around 18 months until scheduled completion (prior to opening in Fall 2022). Fingers crossed. |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Jan 29, 2021 12:55:05 GMT -8
December 2020 status report for Regional Connector. 73.7% complete. Schedules and forecasts will be updated in later reports as the Metro board yesterday approved paying $13 million for the contractor to complete the project earlier.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Feb 14, 2021 22:23:55 GMT -8
The Metro board will receive an update this month on efforts to improve light rail service on the A, E, and L lines (Blue, Expo and Gold) to try to make things less messy once the Regional Connector opens.
1. They will have a report on improvements that can be done in areas that cause delays, estimating it to be out Summer 2021.
2. They will be piloting some kind of better traffic signal priority phasing in Fall 2021.
3. They will conduct a more detailed evaluation on improving Washington/Flower, including looking at restricting some car traffic.
4. They will study increasing the max speed on the A Line (Blue) from 55 mph to 65 or 70 mph.
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 25, 2021 9:02:28 GMT -8
Major Project Status Report for February 2021 is now available. Report shows project is 74% complete. More of the work is reaching the surface in this later stage of the project, especially near stations. So now there is a lot more visible activity. For example, today I had a chance to see the beginnings of the pedestrian bridge at Grand Avenue/Bunker Hill station. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 25, 2021 11:40:01 GMT -8
Here's an article in Urbanize.city about possible improvements to the street-running segment of the Regional Connector. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 6, 2021 14:09:37 GMT -8
Major Project Status Report for February 2021 is now available. Report shows project is 74% complete. More of the work is reaching the surface in this later stage of the project, especially near stations. So now there is a lot more visible activity. For example, today I had a chance to see the beginnings of the pedestrian bridge at Grand Avenue/Bunker Hill station. I'm hopeful that the extra money that was authorized will result in meeting the targeted date, but I'm not optimistic. They haven't even gotten to the portion of the project that seems to be giving nightmares to project managers for underground rail projects from Crenshaw to Crossrail - electrical/communication systems installation and testing. For comparison, Crenshaw was 74% complete 3.3 years ago and is still at least 8 months from opening. If we are to believe Metro, the issue that Crenshaw has been dealing with is a shortage of contractor personnel qualified to perform the systems installation and I don't know that this shortage will be alleviated in the next 1-2 years with three times as many underground stations coming online. Also, just looking at the metro photos it doesn't appear to my unqualified eyes that these stations are anywhere close to the completion level that previous underground stations were 1-1.5 years before being turned over to metro. If I didn't know the schedule, I'd guess that we're closer to 3 years than 2 years and certainly not 1 year as planned. |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Mar 7, 2021 16:59:35 GMT -8
Major Project Status Report for February 2021 is now available. Report shows project is 74% complete. More of the work is reaching the surface in this later stage of the project, especially near stations. So now there is a lot more visible activity. For example, today I had a chance to see the beginnings of the pedestrian bridge at Grand Avenue/Bunker Hill station. I'm hopeful that the extra money that was authorized will result in meeting the targeted date, but I'm not optimistic. They haven't even gotten to the portion of the project that seems to be giving nightmares to project managers for underground rail projects from Crenshaw to Crossrail - electrical/communication systems installation and testing. For comparison, Crenshaw was 74% complete 3.3 years ago and is still at least 8 months from opening. If we are to believe Metro, the issue that Crenshaw has been dealing with is a shortage of contractor personnel qualified to perform the systems installation and I don't know that this shortage will be alleviated in the next 1-2 years with three times as many underground stations coming online. Also, just looking at the metro photos it doesn't appear to my unqualified eyes that these stations are anywhere close to the completion level that previous underground stations were 1-1.5 years before being turned over to metro. If I didn't know the schedule, I'd guess that we're closer to 3 years than 2 years and certainly not 1 year as planned. To be less pessimistic, the contractor and the electricians on the Crenshaw project have been fighting for a long time, and this might be a reason for the delay in the electrical systems for that project: boardarchives.metro.net/BoardBox/2020/200826_WSCC_Payments_Neal_Electric.pdf"Contractor Walsh-Shea (“WSCC”) and Subcontractor Neal Electric Corporation (“Neal”) have on-going disputes related to base contract work, change work, re-work, and outstanding payment amounts." "Neal claims that WSCC owes them in excess of $20 million. Conversely, WSCC alleges that due to Neal’s incomplete/ substandard work, WSCC has overpaid Neal in excess of$27 million and will not make further payments." I do agree that from my untrained eye, it does not look like the Regional Connector is 1 year from finishing. |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Mar 7, 2021 17:02:54 GMT -8
Here is the project status report for January 2021:
Project is 75.6% complete (+1.9% from December), and since Metro agreed to pay them $13m more, schedule has been updated to show progress to accelerate in the next year. The forecast revenue service date is Summer/Fall 2022.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Mar 13, 2021 10:44:18 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Apr 4, 2021 15:12:54 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Apr 5, 2021 9:42:28 GMT -8
So they've got one year (plus two weeks) left to complete the project. Wow.
That blue dashed "Early" line in the "Progress Curve" chart would be a huge improvement in their rate of progress. I'm hoping they can do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Apr 5, 2021 9:59:46 GMT -8
I hate to be such a cynic but Metro paid the contractor $13m more to accelerate the project but it is still basically going at the same rate. It was projected to begin service in Oct 2022 (from 10/2019 status report) before the $13m and it now says it will begin service in Sep 2022. What did that $13m buy us? A few days?
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on May 7, 2021 11:06:24 GMT -8
I hate to be such a cynic but Metro paid the contractor $13m more to accelerate the project but it is still basically going at the same rate. It was projected to begin service in Oct 2022 (from 10/2019 status report) before the $13m and it now says it will begin service in Sep 2022. What did that $13m buy us? A few days? You seem to be right. An independent oversight report says contractor appears to be falling behind again. These reports seem to be required for projects that have cost overruns or delays. |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on May 7, 2021 22:00:33 GMT -8
Let me put on my not amused face...
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 8, 2021 7:17:04 GMT -8
Let me put on my not amused face... Thats what I get for trying to be optimistic. We’re now looking at 2023 for opening. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 16, 2021 20:31:38 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on May 21, 2021 12:12:51 GMT -8
May 2021 Construction Committee meeting comments on Regional Connector--they think contractor will be done in January.
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 24, 2021 12:11:30 GMT -8
May 2021 Construction Committee meeting comments on Regional Connector--they think contractor will be done in January. Really? Even the new trench and incline on Alameda, plus trackwork and systems along that stretch? I'd like to think so, but when I passed by there the other day, it sure didn't look like they could get all that done in 8 months. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 15, 2021 7:59:46 GMT -8
Well, the RC project has reached 79%...or 80%...depending on what part of the report you read. June 2021 Major Project Status Report(don't ask them for consistency, they can't be arsed!) |
|
