|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 28, 2009 13:26:43 GMT -8
I probably wasn't clear, although I knew what I meant.  The Breda trains are at least as quiet for people outside the train and perhaps even more quiet than the other lrv's. And the horns are the quiet buzzer style. They aren't anywhere close to being as loud as the blue line trains that travel through south LA. Of course making blue line trains quieter would result in even more accidents... |
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 28, 2009 17:43:57 GMT -8
^^
It sounds like the Breda trains are better than anything else then.
So, if Breda could agree to the fixes the Metro board asked today, perhaps the best option is to go with Breda. This would not only save them from bankruptcy but also make LA the center of the light-rail industry.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 28, 2009 18:26:32 GMT -8
The cars are too heavy, the seats are too narrow for average sized people, they stall frequently, the A/C is too loud and Breda is almost 3 years late in delivering them. They've already made lots of promises, I don't see why Metro would trust them now. Especially since they've made similar promises to other agencies. Their track record for following through with their promises needs to be taken into consideration and their track record is poor.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 28, 2009 18:39:09 GMT -8
The cars are too heavy, the seats are too narrow for average sized people, they stall frequently, the A/C is too loud and Breda is almost 3 years late in delivering them. They've already made lots of promises, I don't see why Metro would trust them now. Especially since they've made similar promises to other agencies. Their track record for following through with their promises needs to be taken into consideration and their track record is poor. Well, the seats are new MTA specs to create more standee room, not Breda's fault. To quieten the AC shouldn't be too much modification I guess: more sound insulation around the compressor and/or slower fan speed. The reduction in weight, compatibility with other makes, and speedy delivery is part of the new deal proposed today. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 28, 2009 20:58:45 GMT -8
The cars are too heavy, the seats are too narrow for average sized people, they stall frequently, the A/C is too loud and Breda is almost 3 years late in delivering them. They've already made lots of promises, I don't see why Metro would trust them now. Especially since they've made similar promises to other agencies. Their track record for following through with their promises needs to be taken into consideration and their track record is poor. Well, the seats are new MTA specs to create more standee room, not Breda's fault. To quieten the AC shouldn't be too much modification I guess: more sound insulation around the compressor and/or slower fan speed. The reduction in weight, compatibility with other makes, and speedy delivery is part of the new deal proposed today. Do you have proof that they are built to spec? In one of the LA Times articles a Metro spokesman indicated that Metro did not change the specs for the seat size from any of their previous contracts. And it really doesn't give much extra standing room. The aisles are a few inches wider is about all. I haven't seen it tried, but perhaps a wheelchair might be able to fit down the aisle now. I dunno. If it was intentional, I don't get it. Just to give you an idea since you haven't ridden it, the seats are narrower than the bus seats. The seat in front isn't as close as on a bus, but you're closer to the person next to you. And these cars have significantly less standing room than blue line lrv's. That likely is the result of Metro specs. Look at this pic. The front of the car on the blue line cars is all standing room. These cars likely hold10 less people per car.  |
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 28, 2009 21:24:23 GMT -8
^^
Well, I don't have the proof but people have been talking about it in the blogs. MTA needs to be clear in their specs for these trains to be done right and well.
I also don't like the lack of visibility through the operator's-cabin door and small windows as seen in the picture you posted.
Well, perhaps the Breda trains are not a good choice then. Personally I like Japanese engineering most. If they could get a deal with one of the Sharyo's, that would be great.
|
|
|
|
Post by Transit Coalition on May 28, 2009 22:16:46 GMT -8
^^ Well, perhaps the Breda trains are not a good choice then. Personally I like Japanese engineering most. If they could get a deal with one of the Sharyo's, that would be great. Back in the 1980's, RTD or LACTC forced Sumitomo / Nippon Sharyo to put up a huge performance bond for the 69 cars that were ultimately delivered for the Blue Line. And right now, the Israel National Railways has suspended a contract with Siemens, because they are unhappy with the initial operating cars. So, in truth, Breda isn't alone in delivery problems. As for cost, the Breda option is $290 million for 100 cars. A recent order from Siemens for Salt Lake City UTA for 77 cars was for $3.6 million per car. If the Breda order goes out for bid, the taxpayers could end up paying $70 million more for this order. Do you think with that kind of spread, Metro could hire a team to oversee Breda and get them to perform? Policing and plant observation of car assembly is somewhat of a standard in the industry. |
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on May 29, 2009 5:40:17 GMT -8
I admit to being rather torn about the whole Breda thing:
Pros: Local jobs and local control of a burgeoning mass transit effort for Southern California
Cons: Breda is run by a group of consummate liars
Is there ANYONE out there who's reasonable to do business with?
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 29, 2009 7:53:08 GMT -8
Bart I'm nearly positive that I once read that Metro does have one and IIRC more than one person on-site in Italy. Are you saying that they don't?
Also one of the issues with the contract was that it was in US dollars. Not long after the contract started the dollar started to dive versus the Euro and Metro had to agree to pay more money. It was never enough to really satisfy Breda I don't think. I always wondered if that weren't part of the reason for the delay.
Siemens low floor cars seem to work great from all I've heard. IINM San Diego is happy with their Avanto's. Other places are as well. The only places with Breda lrvs' that I'm aware of are SF, LA, and Boston and all three are very disappointed with their lrv's.
|
|
|
|
Post by Transit Coalition on May 29, 2009 12:06:47 GMT -8
Bart I'm nearly positive that I once read that Metro does have one and IIRC more than one person on-site in Italy. Are you saying that they don't? Also one of the issues with the contract was that it was in US dollars. Not long after the contract started the dollar started to dive versus the Euro and Metro had to agree to pay more money. It was never enough to really satisfy Breda I don't think. I always wondered if that weren't part of the reason for the delay. Siemens low floor cars seem to work great from all I've heard. IINM San Diego is happy with their Avanto's. Other places are as well. The only places with Breda lrvs' that I'm aware of are SF, LA, and Boston and all three are very disappointed with their lrv's. The Breda onion is beginning to unpeel. I will find out if Metro has an on-site inspector. It was revealed that Breda didn't have a normal management production team in place and now there is one. There are obviously some problems the way Breda operates. I think Breda just bought Union Track and Signal. As for currency exchange, I am not sure. The original contract had the options for $2.3 and $2.4 million and at one point the value was $3.1 million per car, but is now $2.9 million. One would think that getting 100 cars for $235 million versus the $360 million for 100 Siemens cars is a spread of $125 million. You'd think that someone from Metro would force Breda to comply and deliver what Metro actually needs, not what Breda offers. As you may recall, Siemens did not bid on the order back in 2002 and was non-responsive to the pre-qualifying technical bid. At the time Metro was still in a fight with Siemens of the P-2500 order from 1993. So, should the contract be rebid, will Siemens bid? Would it just be Breda, Nippon Sharyo and Bombarier? What if the other firms didn't work with the Metro specs, just like in 2002? Breda offered to fix the weight issue at the Metro meeting, as well as compatibility issues and all at Breda's cost. All the rail car manufacturer's seem to get into trouble with the various transit properties. (Metrolink-Rotem / Metrolink-Bombardier / Israel National Railroads-Siemens / Las Vegas-Bombarier) So, besides paying someone else who Metro has had issues with, the tax payers get stuck with an increased cost of $70-$150 million for this order. Don't you think a Tiger Team with a budget of say $500,000 could police Breda and get them to perform? Plus, now with the $300 million offer to guarantee performance, wouldn't that cause you to reconsider? |
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Jun 17, 2009 21:49:42 GMT -8
Three-car Breda trains on the Gold Line in Chinatown today (click in the YouTube video frame twice, then the HD button, finally the full-screen button):
|
|
|
|
Post by joshuanickel on Jun 22, 2009 11:00:30 GMT -8
At this months board meeting, number 69 on the agenda is to "consider exercising light rail vehicle option under contract no. P2550."
It looks like Breda proposing a factory right here in LA has changed metro's mind if it involves getting the trains faster.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jun 22, 2009 12:35:32 GMT -8
At this months board meeting, number 69 on the agenda is to "consider exercising light rail vehicle option under contract no. P2550." It looks like Breda proposing a factory right here in LA has changed metro's mind if it involves getting the trains faster. There's something so appropriate about this being number "69"  seriously though, I love the idea of a light rail factory in Los Angeles. I mean, L.A. obviously has the potential to neeed dozens of rail vehicles as the system expands, so it's a no-brainer to have the factory right here. but I hate that it's Breda. I hate hate hate that they're using this as a bargaining chip. why can't it be Siemens? or what ever happened to Nippon Sharyo or any of the other Japanese manufacturers? the fact that this is on the meeting agenda doesn't necessarily mean that they will pass it, but I really hope they don't. |
|
|
|
Post by erict on Jun 22, 2009 13:00:43 GMT -8
Perhaps an American company like GM (or maybe not them) could consider building light rail vehicles since there obviously is a large demand for them that will only grow larger with time?
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jun 22, 2009 22:06:06 GMT -8
Perhaps an American company like GM (or maybe not them) could consider building light rail vehicles since there obviously is a large demand for them that will only grow larger with time? That would be great, but NYCT orders more heavy rail cars than all the lrv's put together and there's no American company for that. And GM doesn't even build buses anymore. I just don't see it happening although I'd like to be wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by tonyw79sfv on Jun 23, 2009 2:42:46 GMT -8
There's something so appropriate about this being number "69" seriously though, I love the idea of a light rail factory in Los Angeles. I mean, L.A. obviously has the potential to neeed dozens of rail vehicles as the system expands, so it's a no-brainer to have the factory right here. but I hate that it's Breda. I hate hate hate that they're using this as a bargaining chip. why can't it be Siemens? or what ever happened to Nippon Sharyo or any of the other Japanese manufacturers? the fact that this is on the meeting agenda doesn't necessarily mean that they will pass it, but I really hope they don't. It seems we've gave up on Nippon Sharyo after the first order for the Green Line. Have we ever considered Kawasaki Heavy Industries? They make the Shinkansens (bullet trains) for Japan in addition to the R160B subway trains for MTA New York City transit (and motorcycles too ;D). |
|
|
|
Post by wad on Jun 23, 2009 4:16:29 GMT -8
It seems we've gave up on Nippon Sharyo after the first order for the Green Line. Have we ever considered Kawasaki Heavy Industries? They make the Shinkansens (bullet trains) for Japan in addition to the R160B subway trains for MTA New York City transit (and motorcycles too ;D). Kawasaki built something for Philadelphia; I'm not sure if it was the streetcars or the subway cars. But the process doesn't work that way, Tony. Metro can't go into a showroom and buy a snazzy new set of train cars. It has to be put up for competitive bidding, so Metro can't really decide on what it wants. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 23, 2009 9:13:50 GMT -8
^ Well it's too bad past performance isn't given more weight in the 'competitive bidding' process. Any company with a history of building trains can promise to deliver X cars for Y dollars. But that doesn't mean they'll be done on time or high quality.
|
|
|
|
Post by Transit Coalition on Jun 23, 2009 10:56:28 GMT -8
^ Well it's too bad past performance isn't given more weight in the 'competitive bidding' process. Any company with a history of building trains can promise to deliver X cars for Y dollars. But that doesn't mean they'll be done on time or high quality. There is one key problem here: Every single rail supplier has had it's problems. The Blue Line car supplier had a huge out-of-court settlement with a performance bond. The Siemens cars took 10 years to finally accept. Metrolink has had problems with MPI, Rotem and Bombardier. In fact, relations with Siemens were so bad in 2002, that Siemens did not even bid on the Breda order. For those that keep making comments that some car company should start making rail cars, I suggest you stop, unless you are a rail industry professional. For example, GM actually did manufacture buses and engines. And now they don't. This is a company that doesn't have expertise in even making a line of cars, so why would the managers have the skill to develop the tooling to build a passenger rail vehicle? The entry into the market against established competitors would cost GM Billions before a first bid proposal would even be submitted. And what guarantee is there that this new firm would submit a winning bid? Further, remember Rohr? That is the company that went from high tech space to build cars for WMATA and BART. Where is this firm today? Here is an NTSB comment on these cars: Either accelerate retirement of Rohr-built railcars, or, if those railcars are not retired but instead rehabilitated, then Rohr-built passenger railcars should be retrofitted with crashworthiness collision protection that is comparable to 6000-series railcars. Breda simply has an old school company culture that fights modern production processes. They do have the political skills to push their product through. And Metro has the skills to make sure the specs and delivery is as required. But, Metro has to apply those skills. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jun 23, 2009 15:38:25 GMT -8
<i>There is one key problem here: Every single rail supplier has had it's problems.</i>
The difference is that those other companies also have their successes. Breda's US lrv's have all been failures. Hopefully the P2550's will be a big success, although at this point I would rather see the blue line keep the existing 20 year old cars so that tells you what I think of them so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by wad on Jun 24, 2009 3:44:55 GMT -8
For those that keep making comments that some car company should start making rail cars, I suggest you stop, unless you are a rail industry professional. For example, GM actually did manufacture buses and engines. And now they don't. This is probably another indictment of the GM Way, but it exited the bus business in the mid-1980s because it was a high-capital, low-productivity division. Quality was never an issue with GM buses. They were actually solid. The New Look is still regarded as the finest transit bus built in North America. Canadian agencies still run them, and pay a premium for used buses. Santa Monica made a pretty good sale when it phased out its Fishbowls. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 24, 2009 7:41:41 GMT -8
When you look at a serial offender like Breda, you really start feeling like you're getting chumped, going back to them after so many failures. I lived through SF Muni's problems in the late 90's, so I remember standing on those massive Breda trains, packed with commuters during rush hour, when they would break down in the middle of a tunnel. It's not an experience I'd like to see repeated here in L.A.
After awhile, one can't help but say: 'Let's get another player into the game.' It doesn't have to be GM, but surely somebody in the U.S. can produce train cars. To paraphrase the common saying: we can put a man on the moon, but we can't build a decent metro train car?
|
|
|
|
Post by transitfan on Jun 25, 2009 8:50:33 GMT -8
For those that keep making comments that some car company should start making rail cars, I suggest you stop, unless you are a rail industry professional. For example, GM actually did manufacture buses and engines. And now they don't. This is probably another indictment of the GM Way, but it exited the bus business in the mid-1980s because it was a high-capital, low-productivity division. Quality was never an issue with GM buses. They were actually solid. The New Look is still regarded as the finest transit bus built in North America. Canadian agencies still run them, and pay a premium for used buses. Santa Monica made a pretty good sale when it phased out its Fishbowls. Yep, and the RTS was another rugged model. RTD/MTA ran the original 1981 RTS-04s for almost 20 years, and some of the 1982 35-footers ran for close to 25 years! Even the TMC-built -06s ran far longer than the 12 years that are usually allocated for transit bus life. |
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jun 25, 2009 13:20:18 GMT -8
Comparing "man on the moon" to "transit cars" (or other local transport issues) isn't just "apples and oranges", it's more like apples and alarm clocks. A moon landing took hundred, if not thousands of people to make sure three astronauts went to the moon and came back safely. A transit system has dozens or at most hundreds of people trying to get thousands to a multitude of destinations. A moon rocket or Space Shuttle is a vehicle that gets weeks of monitoring, testing and TLC before it's sent off. Months elapse between trips. A bus or train gets a quick lookover, probably a brake test, then it's expected to run all day, every day. Probably a closer analogy to a space trip would be a presidential motorcade. It would be nice if every commuter could get a police escort and never have to worry about traffic signals, but it would be totally impossible in the real world.
Regarding old buses: As late as 1980-81, Metro's predecessor RTD was using "old look" coaches from the 50's when they had a big service expansion. At least one still had the Metro Coach Lines road number on the inside. Many were second-hand from Kansas City and Atlanta. When RTD finally got some new rolling stock, they sold the "moldy oldies" to San Francisco Muni, which was having reliability problems with their GM "New Look" buses. Those old klunkers leaked oil and probably got poor fuel mileage (to say nothing of their clouds of exhaust smoke), but they did run.
|
|
|
|
Post by joshuanickel on Jun 25, 2009 17:17:56 GMT -8
Did anyone go to the board meeting today? What was the outcome of number 69 on the agenda?
EditorsNote: Nothing, the matter was postponed for another 30 days.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jul 16, 2009 14:21:34 GMT -8
Here's a "now what's happened?" question: I rode the Gold Line this morning to attend the Measure "R" committe meeting and say my piece for "IWillRide.org". As far as I could tell, all Gold Line trains were pairs of Siemens units; no Bredas were seen in service. At the track outside the maintenance facility (parallel to the active line) there were half a dozen Bredas, including some with lower numbers, which I think had been in revenue service. There were lots more in the yard. Did another "glitch" materialize? Are they in for a scheduled checkup?
|
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jul 17, 2009 14:16:49 GMT -8
According to the Operations memo that I linked to in the construction thread, 26 Breda lrv's have been conditionally accepted. I don't know if there is another glitch, but sometimes I see lots of them running and other times, none. Probably depends on many factors.
Also, in that same memo Metro indicates that they have placed RFP's in trade publications for 113 more lrv's with options for more. They show that they are only getting the original 50 cars from Breda and not the 50 car option. They haven't officially decided AFAIK, but that shows which way the wind is blowing.
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jul 21, 2009 7:31:40 GMT -8
MTA chief recommends against Italian firm's rail carsAgency staffers report that the cars being built by AnsaldoBreda under an existing contract are too heavy and years behind schedule.By Maeve Reston July 21, 2009 Negotiations heated up Monday between Los Angeles County transportation officials and an Italian firm seeking to extend its contract so it can build 100 light-rail cars, a deal worth $300 million. With a decision by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board expected Thursday, agency CEO Art Leahy released a memo recommending against exercising AnsaldoBreda's contract options for the 100 cars. Hours later, the head of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor countered by urging board members to back the Italian firm because of the potential for hundreds of new jobs in the Los Angeles-area in the midst of a recession. Leahy said he was continuing to negotiate with the firm, but he favored seeking proposals from other light-rail companies for 113 new rail cars. At least one, a subsidiary of the German conglomerate Siemens with a headquarters and manufacturing facility in Sacramento, is actively lobbying the agency and has expressed interest in competing for the work. AnsaldoBreda, which is midway through a base contract to build 50 light-rail cars for the agency, has pledged to provide hundreds of direct and indirect local jobs by building a manufacturing plant in Los Angeles if the firm lands the extended deal. But since early this year agency staff advised seeking other bids because they say the firm's first round of cars were 6,000 pounds too heavy and incompatible with others in the fleet -- a requirement that has since been waived by an MTA official -- and that delivery of the last of AnsaldoBreda's 50 base cars will be three years behind schedule. Executives attribute the delays to changes requested by the agency and to the time it has taken to test the cars, and they note that agency officials have publicly praised the cars in their promotional materials. Outlining the status of negotiations in a letter to board members Monday, AnsaldoBreda's lawyer and lead negotiator Jeffrey M. Capaccio said the firm has offered an "unprecedented financial guaranty" of a $50-million irrevocable letter of credit with an automatic replenishment of $25 million should it fail to perform. That is in addition to a $300-million performance bond -- insurance that the company will deliver what is promised -- and $30 million in potential damages should it fail to meet certain criteria, which are still being defined. However, Leahy told board members in his memo that performance bonds and damages were already required under the contract. The additional guaranty of up to $75 million, Leahy said, is "subject to a number of risks." Those risks include "a work plan that has yet to be agreed to, AnsaldoBreda's ability to replenish the letter of credit, uncertain and undefined draw-down triggers, and given the conditions imposed, the funds are not readily available," he said. The chief executive said AnsaldoBreda also had not "provided sufficient assurances that they will be able to remedy the base cars." Earlier this year, the L.A. County Federation of Labor, which is backing the Italian firm, commissioned a study on the number of jobs that could be created if AnsaldoBreda were to build a plant in L.A. Assuming a brisk pace of building 75 cars annually and refurbishing 36 over the same period, the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation found the firm would employ 535 full-time manufacturing employees and 126 at its corporate headquarters, with hundreds of additional indirect jobs throughout the county. The development corporation estimated construction of the proposed $70-million, energy-efficient plant in an industrial stretch of downtown Los Angeles could employ 970 people full time for a year. AnsaldoBreda has pledged to hire union workers to build the plant and the cars. The head of the union coalition, Maria Elena Durazo, urged board members Monday afternoon to exercise AnsaldoBreda's contract options. And she accused Siemens of trying to scramble the potential deal. Durazo urged scrutiny of Siemens' performance in other cities, adding that AnsaldoBreda has "gone above and beyond in demonstrating in every way possible its commitment to Los Angeles County." Oliver Hauck, the president of Siemens Transportation Systems Inc., said the company has "no intent to scuttle anybody's deal, we're just trying to make ourselves known to the customer so the customer knows there are alternative bidders interested." maeve.reston@latimes.com
|
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jul 24, 2009 7:35:26 GMT -8
I guess it's a big deal everywhere when a transit agency acquires new vehicles. It's turned out to be even more so in Turkey, where they can put you in jail much more easily. CEO of the Istanbul MTA (IETT) and 18 other IETT executives were relieved from their duties and are now facing jail time in a court over 250 pieces of Mercedes - Benz Capacity articulated buses they bought from Germany at 450k Euro ($640k) each for the Istanbul BRT (Metrobüs). In the court they've been facing questions such as why did you consult Berlin University but not Istanbul Technical University. The CEO was saying, "I didn't do anything against procedures. I was already carrying out a very difficult job as the CEO of IETT." IETT CEO Mehmet Öztürk in front of a Metrobüs, this one an 85-ft-long, diesel - electric hybrid, double-articulated Dutch-made Phileas, also under government investigation |
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Nov 1, 2009 15:09:56 GMT -8
Finally there will be a bidding process, which will ensure us to get high-quality LRVs.
Metro Light Rail Car Contract DerailedUpdated: Sunday, 01 Nov 2009, 1:18 AM PDT Published : Saturday, 31 Oct 2009, 9:40 PM PDT Los Angeles - A $300 million contract to build 100 new light rail passenger cars for Metro at a new factory in Los Angeles fell through on Saturday, when Metro's board would not agree to financial concessions sought by the Italian company. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority had engaged in "good faith negotiations" with AnsaldoBreda for more than a year to reach an accord over the next batch of 100 self-propelled rail cars, which would have been worth about $300 million, said Metro spokesman Marc Littman. To sweeten the deal, the Italian firm had promised to build a factory in Los Angeles to assemble the rail cars. The Metro board had set a deadline of midnight Oct. 30, "but within hours of the deadline last night, Ansaldo Breda S.p.A. required changes to the agreement that were inconsistent with the board's direction, including financial penalties for late deliveries," Metro officials said in a statement. "Considering Ansaldo Breda S.p.A. has been late in delivering its base order of 50 cars, Metro officials declined to accept this last-minute change." "The Metro board anticipated that this might happen, and directed the staff to come up with a bid package to let other companies compete to build the cars," Littman said. "If all goes according to schedule, the transportation agency's board next spring will award a contract for new rail cars. AnsaldoBreda S.p.A. would be eligible to bid on this new contract along with manufacturers from around the world," according to Metro. A company spokesperson was unavailable to comment this weekend at the firm's headquarters in Naples, Italy. According to Metro, last week its board gave the company more concessions, including a guaranty financial cap and agreed to accept the company's offer of two free rail cars because it couldn't deliver rail cars within the weight limits specified in the contract. The Italian-based firm has a contract to build 50 light rail cars for Metro, but is running three years late on it. Only 27 of the cars have been accepted by Metro, and each is some 6,000 pounds overweight, increasing the public agency's electric consumption and operating costs. The Italian company's contract had been controversial, with some politicians attacking the cost overruns, delivery delays and overweight trains. County Supervisor Mike Antonovich hailed the decision not to sign the contract, saying AnsaldoBreda was backed by City Hall insiders. "As we predicted, Breda failed once again to deliver on a promise to the people of Los Angeles County," he said. "We knew the emperor had no clothes, but Los Angeles city insiders and special interests attempted to ram through a sub-standard outfit, creating costly delays in the MTA's ability to seek a legitimate firm to build railcars for the Foothill Extension, the Crenshaw/LAX Line and the Expo Line. "However, Breda's failure is a significant victory for county taxpayers, as the MTA is now obligated to issue a request for proposals to secure a cost-effective contact with a reputable company who will build quality rail cars, on budget and on time that will serve all of the county's railcar needs." He said Breda is still obligated to deliver the remainder of the cars owed on their current contract and to fix the overweight, undersized cars they have already delivered, and that "the MTA must hold Breda accountable on this issue." Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who had supported the contract, especially because of the promise of a new factory, said the loss was "unfortunate." "In these tough economic times, it was important to make every effort to bring good jobs to L.A. and simultaneously exercise due diligence to protect public funds in pursuing this contract," he said. "Unfortunately, after months of negotiations, at the last minute, satisfactory financial guarantees were not provided and the deal was not signed," he said. "We will continue to work to see that rail cars can be built in L.A. using local funds to reap the job and environmental benefits that a manufacturing plant can bring to the region."
|
|
