|
Post by damiengoodmon on Nov 16, 2008 18:30:40 GMT -8
No one talks about it, but I can count on one hand how many times I've seen deputies on a bus in my entire lifetime of riding MTA/RTD.
Taking security on the Metro system seriously begins with ending the Sheriffs contract and expanding Transit Police.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 16, 2008 18:52:40 GMT -8
I don't think that the Sheriff's transit policing is very good either. They see people eating on the train and platform and often don't even say anything. I was on the blue line and a guy brought large bags of can recyclables and an entire chrome bumper onto a crowded car. The bumper barely fit through the door and then he had to lay it down the aisle blocking people that were seated. Did they say anything? No, but they did make a big deal because a guy brought a bike on during rush hour.
Another time a guy that sells balloons got on with a large steel cylinder of helium. They didn't say anything to him either. Evidently bikes during rush hour are not allowed, but hazardous materials that might pose a threat to passengers are. You would think that after 9/11 that they might watch for such things, but they don't.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Saunders on Nov 28, 2008 21:37:22 GMT -8
Remember Sherrifs Dept outbid LAPD for the Metro security contract. They got the contract merely because they offered a better price. A part of this better price involved relatively low wage fair inspectors in liu of actual trained and armed officers.
|
|
|
Post by erict on Jun 25, 2009 13:15:22 GMT -8
Long Beach (Calif.) Transit (LBT) marked the grand opening of a new 1,900-square-foot Transit and Visitor Information Center located on the Long Beach Transit Mall at the southeast corner of First Street and Pine Avenue — one of the busiest corners in downtown Long Beach, adjacent to the Los Angeles-Long Beach Blue Line Light Rail. “This center provides our customers with a beautiful artistic building and more services that meet their travel needs,” said Renee Simon, chair, LBT Board of Directors. The Long Beach Transit Mall hosts the majority of LBT's routes and is also served by L.A. Metro, Torrance Transit and the Los Angeles Department of Transportation, making it a major transit hub in the southeastern region of Los Angeles County. The new center provides the following transit and visitor amenities: » Expanded window service hours: open Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., and Friday through Sunday 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. » Route information given by Transit Representatives at three ADA-accessible windows. » An ADA-accessible visitor window dedicated to Long Beach attractions and visitor information, staffed in partnership with the Long Beach Convention and Visitors’ Bureau and Downtown Long Beach Associates. » LBT bus pass sales. » ID card processing for senior and legally blind customers and students. » Real-time transit schedule display, along with a touch-screen kiosk that provides 24 hour transit information. » Transit customer lost and found services. » Downtown Long Beach’s first public restrooms with a dedicated attendant for custodial and surveillance services. The restrooms are free to the public and are open daily from 5:00 a.m. to 1:30 a.m. The center adds visual interest to downtown Long Beach’s landscape with its undulating steel walls, dramatic exterior security lighting, energy saving oval-shaped skylights and two floating fabric canopies that all reinforce the city’s nautical themes. LBT is also utilizing the center, which is on track for LEED-EB certification, as an opportunity to pilot and create sustainable policies for the agency’s overall management and operations.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 27, 2009 21:08:14 GMT -8
I rode at rush hour Wednesday for the first time in months and noticed that at 7th/metro they no longer alight on Platform 1 and use the tail tracks to move the trains to Platform 2 for boarding. When did this change?
|
|
|
Post by ieko on Nov 27, 2009 22:36:43 GMT -8
I don't know when it started, but I know that this has been normal for some time now.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 28, 2009 12:02:51 GMT -8
Thanks ieko. It seems to work well. It was overkill to board on a separate platform from where they let passengers off, although they will have to return to the old procedure when Expo opens because trains will come too quickly.
We never did figure out why trains use platform 1 after 8pm did we?
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Nov 28, 2009 15:17:26 GMT -8
Thanks ieko. It seems to work well. It was overkill to board on a separate platform from where they let passengers off, although they will have to return to the old procedure when Expo opens because trains will come too quickly. We never did figure out why trains use platform 1 after 8pm did we? I believe I've heard from someone at Metro that they switch the track pattern after 8 pm to even out the wear-and-tear on the turnouts at 7th St./Metro Center.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Dec 20, 2009 18:21:55 GMT -8
Another idea. Add southern station entrances at both Compton and San Pedro to help balance out passenger distribution. The northern cars are always more crowded than the southernmost car. The northernmost car can sometimes be almost crush loaded and there are still seats on the southernmost car.
Also widen the platform at Florence. I'm not sure of the physical constraints or circumstances that lead to that platform being more narrow than any other platform on the line, but it's one of the busier stations and for safety reasons should be widened sooner than later.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Dec 23, 2009 4:26:29 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by losangeles2319 on Dec 23, 2009 17:39:20 GMT -8
The Line does look better!
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Dec 23, 2009 23:12:03 GMT -8
Who should I contact in Long Beach to advocate for signal priority? Long Beach Transit? LB Dept of Transportation? Caltrans?
10 minutes from Downtown to Willow would be SO much better. Right now the buses on Atlantic and LB Blvd are not much slower, and the 66 bus (which stops only every 1/2 mile) is just as fast from downtown to Willow, or maybe 1 minute faster. That 1-way loop and all those red lights really add up.
|
|
|
Post by erict on Dec 24, 2009 9:28:32 GMT -8
I think that the Blue Line Expo junction at Washington and Flower is going to be a disaster once Expo starts running. Washington will need to be grade separated somehow, lowering it in a trench under the rail junction or something. Both rail lines will benefit by an underpass of the roadway.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Dec 31, 2009 20:22:07 GMT -8
I think that the Blue Line Expo junction at Washington and Flower is going to be a disaster once Expo starts running. Washington will need to be grade separated somehow, lowering it in a trench under the rail junction or something. Both rail lines will benefit by an underpass of the roadway. Eric, you may be on to something. What they need to do is push Washington into a trench underneath Flower. The tracks ought to be configured as an at-grade wye so trains can go in several directions. The existing station at Washington/San Pedro can remain intact, I would hope. And there ought to be a cool-looking, artsy pedestrian bridge over the intersection.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Dec 31, 2009 23:00:28 GMT -8
James, they can just dust off the design they were planning for the Regional Connector wye in Little Tokyo, including the "artsy pedestrian bridge"! ;-)
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jan 17, 2010 10:44:58 GMT -8
Who should I contact in Long Beach to advocate for signal priority? Long Beach Transit? LB Dept of Transportation? Caltrans? 10 minutes from Downtown to Willow would be SO much better. Right now the buses on Atlantic and LB Blvd are not much slower, and the 66 bus (which stops only every 1/2 mile) is just as fast from downtown to Willow, or maybe 1 minute faster. That 1-way loop and all those red lights really add up. I don't think that the blue line has signal priority on Flower or Washington either. I think that the lights are just timed. It works well during non-rush hour. The part of the blue line that seems to have signal priority is between Washington and Willow. It would seem that only grade crossings with crossing arms are eligible for signal prioritization. It's might be harder to time the lights for the trains in Long Beach because of the loop. Trains cross the same street at multiple locations. a mile apart. But they should be able to do better than where we are now.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jan 17, 2010 12:08:18 GMT -8
Thanks ieko. It seems to work well. It was overkill to board on a separate platform from where they let passengers off, although they will have to return to the old procedure when Expo opens because trains will come too quickly. We never did figure out why trains use platform 1 after 8pm did we? I believe I've heard from someone at Metro that they switch the track pattern after 8 pm to even out the wear-and-tear on the turnouts at 7th St./Metro Center. Thank you. Seems so simple, but makes sense I guess. Although now that they load/unload from only Platform 2 the unbalance must be worse than ever.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 8, 2010 9:33:44 GMT -8
Plus Metro ran a story in mid-January describing plans being developed by Metro to improve and upgrade "Rosa Parks Station" at Imperial/Wilmington, the transfer point between the Blue and Green Lines. At the community meeting convened to gather public input, people said the following about Rosa Parks station: - Where's Rosa Parks?
- Drivers don't call out the correct station name.
- Transfer way-finding is a problem.
- No color, No Hope.
- Landscaping has disappeared over the years.
- Doesn't have any Rosa Parks information or artwork.
- The Station is too dark: "The Metro Station is darker in the daytime than at night."
- Doesn't feel safe.
- Maintenance is a problem.
- Blue line has only one entrance/exit.
- Lack of way-finding makes transfers very difficult.
- Green line platform is very noisy with freeway traffic.
- Encourage an increased sense of safety.
- Favored community gardens and space for farmers' markets.
- Increased housing density would allow for more community green space, including community gardens.
Initial renderings show platforms that are better protected from the elements (including glass walls at the platforms) and that are better connected to the surrounding area. The full article is here.
|
|
|
Post by erict on Mar 8, 2010 13:04:33 GMT -8
I have to agree that Rosa Parks needs updating. I have never liked his station much- it has poor lighting, looks sorta ugly, and is very noisy. As a station it has that "worn" look like Chicago, but not in a good way. It never failed that you would arrive at the station only to see the connecting train already leaving or just arriving - so you have to run to catch the train. The Blue line seems like it waits for the Green line trains, but not the reverse. You also have to be on the lookout for crime. I always stayed near other people and never had a problem, but I could see some shifty characters hovering around the station. Sound walls for all of the Green line station is a good idea as well.
|
|
|
Post by trackman on Mar 9, 2010 19:16:45 GMT -8
Washington and Flower: per a google map search, there appears will only be a single conflict point between the Blue Line and the Exposition Line; southern running Blues versus northern running Expositions.
The other merge points are quite normal.
If either the northern running Expositions OR the Southern running Blues were put in a trench or elevated a the junction/intersection, this would seem much better for all. I have no idea why the Blue Line is not already in a trench or aerial here, as it seems it should have been to begin with!
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 9, 2010 21:34:59 GMT -8
Remember that the Blue Line was designed over 20 years ago. It had been over 25 years since LA had any local rail transportation. Ridership and train frequencies were still in the "your guess is as good as mine" stage. We should also remember that the "role model" for light rail in California was the San Diego Trolley, which emphasized a cost-conscious design philosophy.
|
|
|
Post by transitfan on Mar 10, 2010 6:53:20 GMT -8
Indeed. It amuses me when I recall that the initial 54 car order from Sumitomo/Nippon-Sharyo was intended for 32 cars to go to the Blue Line and the other 22 to the Green Line. The ridership projections on the Blue were such that they thought 32 cars would suffice initially. Subsequently, it was decided that the Green Line would be automated, so a separate order would be needed for that line, so all 54 cars were assigned to the Blue. Well, long story short, the Blue Line exceeded all expectations, all 54 of the cars were needed for it, and MTA had to make a separate order for 15 more Sumitomo cars to open the Green Line in 1995. The Blue Line's popularity continued to rise, so that when the Green Line got its own fleet of Siemens P2000 cars, those other 15 Nippon-Sharyos ended up on the Blue Line as well. From 32 cars to 69 cars, amazing ;D Like Bob said, at the beginning, no one had any idea about ridership levels.
(and of course, the Green Line automation was shelved).
|
|
|
Post by wad on Mar 11, 2010 4:24:43 GMT -8
Remember that the Blue Line was designed over 20 years ago. It had been over 25 years since LA had any local rail transportation. Ridership and train frequencies were still in the "your guess is as good as mine" stage. We should also remember that the "role model" for light rail in California was the San Diego Trolley, which emphasized a cost-conscious design philosophy. A generation later, San Diego has forgotten "the wisdom of the ancients." You'd think San Diego began to emulate L.A.! In that time, San Diego has bought its own custom Siemens cars instead of the Austrian Duewag imports. It was only discovered after delivery that the 3000 series cars couldn't run on the older sections. San Diego has a Crackton Transfer in Old Town, where the Green and Blue lines end but don't really need to. It's also developed brand new rights of way (Green Line), and gotten rid of the zone fare for a flat fare. Granted, it's less confusing, but the short-trip riders got socked with a huge fare increase.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 11, 2010 14:14:15 GMT -8
If either the northern running Expositions OR the Southern running Blues were put in a trench or elevated a the junction/intersection, this would seem much better for all. I have no idea why the Blue Line is not already in a trench or aerial here, as it seems it should have been to begin with! You're definitely not alone in having that opinion. Unfortunately, though, it would be costly, and every option (aerial vs. subway, Blue grade-separated vs. Expo grade-separated, etc.) has its problems. Some have suggested converting the Washington segment of the Blue Line aerial along 18th Street, with the northbound train coming down to ground level between Grand and Flower. This could work, but would move the station farther away from the LATTC campus.
|
|
|
Post by erict on Mar 11, 2010 15:06:41 GMT -8
What is the process for changing an at-grade rail crossing to one where the street goes under the tracks? I imagine it is a monumental and expensive task. The ACE is doing just that ( www.theaceproject.org/). I would think the blue line on Long Beach blvd. and the Expo and the Blue line at Washington/Flower would be best solved this way...some day.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Mar 12, 2010 11:02:32 GMT -8
Why was Green Line automation shelved? Politics, or engineering reasons? The Skytrain in Vancouver has enviably high headways in the evening and on weekends. I can't help but think that the lower operating costs (no drivers to pay) and subsequently higher headways would have helped out the Green Line quite a bit.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Mar 12, 2010 14:56:27 GMT -8
Why was Green Line automation shelved? Politics, or engineering reasons? Here's the 1995 report describing why Metro decided not to automate the Green Line. Metro claimed that "ridership projections...through FY 2015 do not warrant a reduction in headway to the point of justifying automated operation. Whether or not political factors were involved, I cannot personally say.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Mar 17, 2010 15:13:49 GMT -8
It would only have cost $15 million to automate 34 trains. We would have saved some costs on operation (600,000 per year, according to the linked report) due to not paying for driver wages and benefits, though the trains would wear out somewhat faster by being used all evening long and on weekends. The cost would have been less than $1 million per year, or a few cents per passenger if the Green Line had med expectations.
It sounds to me like we missed a great chance to actually make the Green Line useful. It would help if it were not in a freeway and surrounded by mainly low-density, unwalkable developement, but with 6 minute headways from 5 am to midnight, the Green Line would be a reliable, convenient system. And as mentioned above, waiting 3 minutes in the freeway median is much better than waiting 15 minutes.
Now, I can see that it would have limited expansion options, since extensions would have needed complete grade separation as well. But we could always have gone back to light-rail operation in the future.
Next time we buy new trains for the Green Line, we need to suggest changing to automatic operation.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Mar 17, 2010 15:20:57 GMT -8
The metro report (http://boardarchives.metro.net/Items/1995/11_November/items_k_0011.pdf) shows a depressing lack of understanding about the use of high frequency transit. It appears Metro only wanted to run full trains, rather than providing frequent service to encourage people to use the system without a timetable all evening long and on weekends:
"Ridership projections show that there is no justification to warrant reduced headways which improve Metro Green Line service frequency becauset he passenger demand is never projected to be more than 50% of design capacity."
They later note that design capacity is for 76 seated and 76 standing for car. So "50% full" means there are no seats! That's not my idea of a full train, especially on a long-distance, high-speed service like the Green Line.
High frequencies let you use a transit line without checking the schedule, especially if the frequency remains high anytime you might want to take transit. If frequency drops to every 20 minutes or even every 15 minutes during mid-day or at night, you have to be constantly thinking about the schedule. If there is poor service on weekends, you need a car or bike or something to get places other than work.
We shouldn't be building expensive, grade-separated rail lines than then running them at low frequencies all day except for rush hour. It doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
Post by erict on Mar 17, 2010 17:07:00 GMT -8
The best bet for the Green line in my opinion is expansion so that it actually goes somewhere useful, not automation (which the unions would oppose). I used to ride the Green line all of the time, and it was a very nice and speedy ride. I did like the 4 stations in El Segundo and Redondo Beach the best.
|
|