|
|
Post by numble on Sept 8, 2021 17:37:32 GMT -8
Metro estimates a $425 million construction cost to put improved barriers on the 210 freeway to prevent vehicles from crashing onto the Gold Line tracks. This project has been slowly moving since 2014 with various studies and designs and we finally have a construction estimate.
Details on the high costs, from a 2019 report:
|
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Sept 9, 2021 5:30:35 GMT -8
So another reason not to run rail in the middle of the freeway?? Lol
|
|
|
|
Post by andert on Sept 9, 2021 16:13:34 GMT -8
Seeing differing accounts on whether Friedman's shenanigans killed all state infrastructure funding, including the $1B olympics money and the funds the montclair extension was relying on. Whole thing seems like a giant mess. Anyone have any insight?
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Sept 10, 2021 7:54:15 GMT -8
Seeing differing accounts on whether Friedman's shenanigans killed all state infrastructure funding, including the $1B olympics money and the funds the montclair extension was relying on. Whole thing seems like a giant mess. Anyone have any insight? I think midnight tonight is the end of the California legislature session for the year, unless the governor calls for a special session. As of right now, the transportation funds were not set into law for the year, so they won’t be law unless something happens before midnight. Friedman says they plan to take it up in January. If you listen to the SGVCOG transportation committee here (16m 9s mark), the Foothill Gold Line folks also just describe it as being deferred to next year, and they still are optimistic they will get it (but get it next year instead of this year): m.youtube.com/watch?v=m5-ToIqSJY8&t=16m9s |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Sept 10, 2021 9:27:41 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by andert on Sept 10, 2021 9:41:24 GMT -8
God, that is *brutal*. 18 months and $200M increase due to missing that october deadline? They're right, this very well could keep the extension from getting built at all. I'm more upset that it's also going to delay by at least six months any progress on projects that could use the $1B olympics acceleration money, which will only add costs on top of the schedule issues. What a terrible decision from Friedman. She's my assembly member and I am not happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Sept 10, 2021 11:07:05 GMT -8
God, that is *brutal*. 18 months and $200M increase due to missing that october deadline? They're right, this very well could keep the extension from getting built at all. I'm more upset that it's also going to delay by at least six months any progress on projects that could use the $1B olympics acceleration money, which will only add costs on top of the schedule issues. What a terrible decision from Friedman. She's my assembly member and I am not happy. I do think the Gold Line extension probably had the most to lose because they had a contract option that expires in October, but who knows, maybe the expiration date on the option would be extended. The Purple Line Section 3 contractor extended the contract offer expiration date when Metro was delayed in getting federal funding. When transit agencies are in "lobby" mode, I'm a bit more skeptical about their claims about costs--they are trying to put pressure on politicians to act faster. For other projects, if it is just delayed to January, I don't think there would be much in the way of delays. Most of the projects are just proceeding through the long environmental review process right now, and more construction money doesn't speed them up. A lot of the projects are sitting on money that was awarded over 3 years ago when the state started doling out money after the gas tax was increased: thesource.metro.net/2018/04/26/state-recommends-1-792-billion-in-grants-for-metro-projects/ |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Sept 10, 2021 12:11:10 GMT -8
Transportation proposals from House Democrats for the reconciliation bill have been released: transportation.house.gov/imo/media/doc/2021-09-09%20Section%20by%20Section%20.pdf$10 billion: Projects that enhance access to affordable housing and mobility, including for new transit routes, free or reduced transit, transit maintenance, and transit planning. $4 billion: Projects that reduce greenhouse gases. $4 billion: Projects that reconnect communities impacted by transportation projects. $6 billion: Local transportation projects. $10 billion: High speed rail. |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Sept 13, 2021 13:34:49 GMT -8
Metro’s September 2021 summary of construction project status. Sometimes these are less accurate than the individual status reports—it depends on when the presentation is prepared. If it is prepared too early, the information in the presentation can be from 2 months ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Sept 15, 2021 18:46:25 GMT -8
For some reason, the contract/procurement for the Vermont Transit Corridor EIR was cancelled. Maybe it was a procurement issue, or maybe they decided to do something different, like split out the BRT aspects.
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Sept 16, 2021 17:01:28 GMT -8
I-105 ExpressLanes can raise $3 billion (over 40 years) to pay for transit projects. I guess that means it can pay for $1.5 billion or so if they wanted to get bond financing. The same information says it costs about $620 million in future toll revenue to pay for bonds that raise $362 million to pay for construction. Dutra has mentioned in 2 meetings that he wants to use this money to help pay for WSAB, though other directors have focused on upgrades to the C Line (Green).
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 16, 2021 20:01:02 GMT -8
I-105 ExpressLanes can raise $3 billion (over 40 years) to pay for transit projects. I guess that means it can pay for $1.5 billion or so if they wanted to get bond financing. The same information says it costs about $620 million in future toll revenue to pay for bonds that raise $362 million to pay for construction. Dutra has mentioned in 2 meetings that he wants to use this money to help pay for WSAB, though other directors have focused on upgrades to the C Line (Green). Have they discussed which upgrades? Presumably platform lengthening on Aviation, Mariposa, Douglas, and Redondo Beach (El Segundo appears long enough for three cars already). That won't cost billions of dollars, but I can't think of what else that has been mentioned that could be done by 2028 to the existing line. |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Sept 16, 2021 22:03:23 GMT -8
I-105 ExpressLanes can raise $3 billion (over 40 years) to pay for transit projects. I guess that means it can pay for $1.5 billion or so if they wanted to get bond financing. The same information says it costs about $620 million in future toll revenue to pay for bonds that raise $362 million to pay for construction. Dutra has mentioned in 2 meetings that he wants to use this money to help pay for WSAB, though other directors have focused on upgrades to the C Line (Green). Have they discussed which upgrades? Presumably platform lengthening on Aviation, Mariposa, Douglas, and Redondo Beach (El Segundo appears long enough for three cars already). That won't cost billions of dollars, but I can't think of what else that has been mentioned that could be done by 2028 to the existing line. Yeah, they have been trying to find funding to extend platforms and also add traction power substations to support 3-car trains. If you look at one of the slides in that tweet, they specifically say “Station Platform Expansion and Traction Power Substation”. My speculation about bonding the future tolls to pay for something earlier is just my own thoughts. In the meeting today, they said they could tap into $200 million in the first 5 years after the ExpressLanes opens, so that would be in 2027-2032. The slides also say they are looking for grant funding for the C Line upgrades. They had applied for a state grant last year, but they basically lost out to the Inglewood People Mover for that grant. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 17, 2021 6:53:02 GMT -8
Thanks. I see it now.
The only platform that desperately needs to be extended is Aviation and extending the other platforms are a "nice to have". The reason is that the planned operation between Rosa Parks and Redondo Beach is a worse service for those stations than the existing service and even now 2 cars are more then enough S/W of Aviation. The only reasons to extend the other platforms would be for operational flexibility (which would be a poor reason) or more significantly, if they change the services to what really makes the most sense: Norwalk-LAX and Redondo Beach-Crenshaw/Expo.
The South Bay cities were strongly against a Redondo Beach-Crenshaw/Expo service and their stated reason for opposing that service was that they wanted existing riders coming from the eastern end of the line to still be able to reach the South Bay without having to double back after changing trains at Century.They wanted the C line to stay as it currently is. The compromise means that riders from the east still have to change trains, but they save a few minutes by not having to double back. The South Bay cities didn't say much about riders from the south bay and honestly there aren't many currently. The South Bay doesn't think of the train as benefitting their constituents and see it as a means for working class to access jobs in their area.
I think that they may change their thinking when they see how easy it is to get to/from LAX when the people mover and the new station open. Then maybe we get the service that should be there. Until then it's actually good for them that they have this trial service from Rosa Parks to Redondo since the Crenshaw line will be a bit of a joke for the first few years with all of the gaps in service.
|
|
|
|
Post by culvercitylocke on Sept 21, 2021 13:35:48 GMT -8
For some reason, the contract/procurement for the Vermont Transit Corridor EIR was cancelled. Maybe it was a procurement issue, or maybe they decided to do something different, like split out the BRT aspects. my cynical take as a rider that was formerly dependent on the Vermont lines for my first three years in L.A. The reason was probably classic metro racism. Vermont serves primarily non white communities, and any EIR was going to show that it's the best performing investment for rail for any corridor in the entire United States. Metro does not want to build rail on Vermont, they want to build buses, they want an EIR that gives that conclusion. Because they will never get an EIR that satisfies their racist policies and positions, they have to kill the procurement and restart it to only be BRT. systemic, institutional racism is a helluva drug. |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Sept 21, 2021 15:24:34 GMT -8
For some reason, the contract/procurement for the Vermont Transit Corridor EIR was cancelled. Maybe it was a procurement issue, or maybe they decided to do something different, like split out the BRT aspects. my cynical take as a rider that was formerly dependent on the Vermont lines for my first three years in L.A. The reason was probably classic metro racism. Vermont serves primarily non white communities, and any EIR was going to show that it's the best performing investment for rail for any corridor in the entire United States. Metro does not want to build rail on Vermont, they want to build buses, they want an EIR that gives that conclusion. Because they will never get an EIR that satisfies their racist policies and positions, they have to kill the procurement and restart it to only be BRT. systemic, institutional racism is a helluva drug. The board voted in April 2019 (2.5 years ago) and told Metro to do an EIR with the rail elements, so Metro staff has to follow the board's direction, so they need to do an EIR with the rail elements. They already are doing a feasibility study for the southern extension, with rail elements. metro.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3926484&GUID=0889002A-1615-4421-B7D7-3D1AED4B0AFA&Options=ID|Text|& |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Sept 22, 2021 8:49:33 GMT -8
For some reason, the contract/procurement for the Vermont Transit Corridor EIR was cancelled. Maybe it was a procurement issue, or maybe they decided to do something different, like split out the BRT aspects. my cynical take as a rider that was formerly dependent on the Vermont lines for my first three years in L.A. The reason was probably classic metro racism. Vermont serves primarily non white communities, and any EIR was going to show that it's the best performing investment for rail for any corridor in the entire United States. Metro does not want to build rail on Vermont, they want to build buses, they want an EIR that gives that conclusion. Because they will never get an EIR that satisfies their racist policies and positions, they have to kill the procurement and restart it to only be BRT. systemic, institutional racism is a helluva drug. I'm not sure that metro's previous positions were entirely due to racism. My take is that until very recent years Vermont would have had absolutely no shot at federal rail funding because federal models favored rail lines that would get people out of cars and onto public transport. Lines that moved people from buses to trains were far less desirable. Priorities have shifted somewhat due to climate change and more recently and dramatically due to equity. These changes will make Vermont a very credible candidate for rail. The farther south it goes, the better it does at getting people out of cars and hitting all of the bases. |
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Oct 3, 2021 11:19:30 GMT -8
my cynical take as a rider that was formerly dependent on the Vermont lines for my first three years in L.A. The reason was probably classic metro racism. Vermont serves primarily non white communities, and any EIR was going to show that it's the best performing investment for rail for any corridor in the entire United States. Metro does not want to build rail on Vermont, they want to build buses, they want an EIR that gives that conclusion. Because they will never get an EIR that satisfies their racist policies and positions, they have to kill the procurement and restart it to only be BRT. systemic, institutional racism is a helluva drug. Lines that moved people from buses to trains were far less desirable. Priorities have shifted somewhat due to climate change and more recently and dramatically due to equity. These changes will make Vermont a very credible candidate for rail. The farther south it goes, the better it does at getting people out of cars and hitting all of the bases. Let's throw out the racism card immediately for this corridor and my family lives one block away from Vermont just south of the Coliseum. This is simply a funding issue. One of the reasons I have been posting the importance of understanding the cash flow of Measure M projects is that we can understand what can realistically get done while at the same time expand our vision pragmatically. The board followed this pipe dream knowing damn well they had no way to loosen resources for it. (Considering that WSAB, South Bay Extension, Eastside Extension, Sepulveda Pass are the core pillar projects that will get the first crack and these projects are costing more by the day) As much as I would want to see a Vermont Avenue Rail Corridor the money isn't there for it. Let's focus the advocacy to maximizing the use and availability of dedicated bus lanes for this critical corridor so it can be a gold standard that will be used for other high use bus corridors. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Oct 10, 2021 14:50:19 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Oct 10, 2021 17:49:35 GMT -8
I took the subway on Thursday and it was the only time I’ve really felt unsafe during the day on Metro. At Vermont/Beverly, there was a guy shouting and walking the platform. Another two people had set up on a bench at the end of the platform with trash everywhere and one guy was openly smoking crack. There were a few puddles on the platform, which I believe were urine. This was at 8:00 am. The good news was that when I returned late in the afternoon the anarchy wasn’t apparent. That is 6 people shot in less than a month. There should be outrage, but it seems like this has been downplayed and buried. |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Oct 11, 2021 10:02:01 GMT -8
I'm guessing none of the victims were white anglo so there is no huge outcry or around the clock news coverage. I'm being cynical but you all know I'm right.
Imagine 6 people were shot on separate drive by incidents in Pacific Palisades or Santa Monica in a few weeks...
|
|
|
|
Post by numble on Oct 12, 2021 15:57:00 GMT -8
Here is Metro’s explanation for the cancelled procurement of the Vermont Corridor environmental review contract—they plan to do community engagement to gather community input for the next 6 months, which will shape what the study will be looking at, and then after that, they will proceed with awarding a contract to do the environmental review.
|
|
|
|
Post by bzzzt on Oct 13, 2021 9:48:19 GMT -8
Not a peep about the murder on the Metro Source webpage, either. Very disappointing. At least the LA Times reported it.
|
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Oct 13, 2021 17:50:34 GMT -8
Not a peep about the murder on the Metro Source webpage, either. Very disappointing. At least the LA Times reported it. They haven’t reported any of the recent shootings, which is a change from a few years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Oct 15, 2021 16:08:52 GMT -8
California Assemblymembers Anthony Rendon and Laura Friedman are asking Governor Gavin Newsom for $4 billion to fund Los Angeles transit projects in exchange for funding California High Speed Rail from Merced to Bakersfield. Newsom had proposed $1 billion for LA projects.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Oct 16, 2021 18:06:55 GMT -8
I'm pretty sure that Newsom thinks that spending money for rail is wasted in Southern California and if he had his way it would all go to the Bay Area. He's said things along those lines in the past.
|
|
|
|
Post by transitfan on Oct 18, 2021 7:03:30 GMT -8
I'm pretty sure that Newsom thinks that spending money for rail is wasted in Southern California and if he had his way it would all go to the Bay Area. He's said things along those lines in the past. Maybe I am misremembering, but when Newsom was mayor of San Francisco, I thought I remember him doing something against Muni. I don't recall the details, and like I said, I may be misremembering. I haven't liked him since 😡 |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Oct 18, 2021 10:49:15 GMT -8
I'm pretty sure that Newsom thinks that spending money for rail is wasted in Southern California and if he had his way it would all go to the Bay Area. He's said things along those lines in the past. Maybe it was when he was mayor of San Francisco? I doubt he would have said it when he was Lieutenant Governor or Governor. I think the key is Newsom proposed $4.2 billion for High Speed Rail and $1 billion for LA (Olympics). Rendon/Friedman are proposing $2.5 billion for High Speed Rail and $4 billion for LA transportation. If I had to guess the outcome, LA would probably get more than the $1 billion that Newsom initially proposed. |
|
|
|
Post by numble on Oct 18, 2021 11:51:54 GMT -8
Metro’s procurement website now says they expect to advertise for the Vermont Transit Corridor environmental review contract in March of 2022: Here is Metro’s explanation for the cancelled procurement of the Vermont Corridor environmental review contract—they plan to do community engagement to gather community input for the next 6 months, which will shape what the study will be looking at, and then after that, they will proceed with awarding a contract to do the environmental review. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Oct 18, 2021 15:31:05 GMT -8
I'm pretty sure that Newsom thinks that spending money for rail is wasted in Southern California and if he had his way it would all go to the Bay Area. He's said things along those lines in the past. Maybe it was when he was mayor of San Francisco? I doubt he would have said it when he was Lieutenant Governor or Governor. I think the key is Newsom proposed $4.2 billion for High Speed Rail and $1 billion for LA (Olympics). Rendon/Friedman are proposing $2.5 billion for High Speed Rail and $4 billion for LA transportation. If I had to guess the outcome, LA would probably get more than the $1 billion that Newsom initially proposed. I can't find a quote, so I may be way off but somewhere around the time of his state of the state in 2019 when he panicked everyone about HSR, I thought that he discussed that his priority would be to get the train to SF, but getting it to LA made less sense because people in LA don't ride trains as much as they do in the Bay. It could be that I read someone else's take on his state of the state because I can't find him saying anything like that. |
|
