|
Post by trackman on Mar 7, 2011 17:33:38 GMT -8
Did Metro have a choice?
Breda HAD a contract, but, they weren't performing. Thus, Metro must have felt they needed to start a new purchase.
|
|
|
Post by erict on Mar 7, 2011 18:19:45 GMT -8
M.R.T. Strikes again, he seems to be the political thorn in the side of Metro.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 7, 2011 19:17:41 GMT -8
I don't see how the availability of vehicles would be a concern for Phase 1. The preliminary plan of 23 trains assigned to Expo is already doable. And that number leaves 5 extra cars for what would most likely be the maximum service level (6x3-car consists running every 12 minutes) for phase 1. Where they could get into trouble is that given past history the new cars for phase 2 will be late, but of course given past history so will phase 2.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 7, 2011 19:25:07 GMT -8
Did Metro have a choice? Breda HAD a contract, but, they weren't performing. Thus, Metro must have felt they needed to start a new purchase. Metro definitely had to cancel the Breda contract: Breda apparently couldn't deliver vehicles to Metro's spec. The issue is how long it has taken to put the new contract out to bid. Metro decided to end the contract with Breda in February 2009, and completely ended negotiations with Breda in October 2009. It's not like Metro was taken by surprise: they've known about this for a long time. Given the major projects slated to come online in the next five years, I would think Metro could've put out a new RFP sooner than October 2010.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 7, 2011 19:44:42 GMT -8
OK, for the die hards - here is a 16 minute video of the Expo Line Phase I - I took yesterday while in town. Wow Alex! Thanks for that! I usually try and drive the line every month or so and it's been at least that long but you've saved me the trip. This will be good historical footage because we're going to see lots of changes along the line over the next 5-20 years. Especially along Flower and west of La Brea.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Mar 8, 2011 11:18:59 GMT -8
The biggest concern is the availability of LRVs, as Metro not only hasn't purchased any new light-rail trains yet but also hasn't announced such a pending purchase. We will see if the extra Blue, Gold, and Green Line trains will be enough. Things are even more worrisome for 2015, when Expo Phase 2 and Gold Line Foothill Extension will need many dozen more LRVs, and there is a good possibility that they won't be available nearly on time. In June of last year, the Metro Board was asked to approve a solicitation of a new LRV contract (for "P3000" vehicles). The Metro Board punted this solicitation until October, because Ridley-Thomas wanted to include language supporting disadvantaged local businesses. Ultimately, in October, the Metro Board approved a solicitation for procurement of the next-generation vehicles, now known as "P3100" vehicles. Metro expects to award a contract within a year of Board approval (i.e., contract by October 2011). Metro then expects that it will take "at least 24 months" to design and deliver a prototype for testing: this brings us out to at least late 2013 (but more likely 2014). The original staff recommendation in June addressed Expo Phase I: "Expo Phase I will begin revenue operation using LRVs from the existing fleet until the first P3000 cars begin to arrive in 2014." The base buy of 78 new cars is to be divided among the projects as follows: - Expo Phase I -- 16 LRVs
- Expo Phase II -- 47 LRVs
- Foothill Extension -- 15 LRVs
In my opinion, Metro has created quite a bit of risk to itself, by waiting so long to start the procurement process. Metro may wind up not having enough vehicles for all of its new projects. Mark-Ridley Thomas' insistence on favoring disadvantaged local companies delayed the solicitation by four months. When 2014 comes, Metro is going to be wishing it hadn't dragged its feet for so long. Thanks for the great detail, though I'm curious what the P3000 and P3100 designations indicate. I'm not as well read on trains themselves as I should be.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 8, 2011 13:23:06 GMT -8
Thanks for the great detail, though I'm curious what the P3000 and P3100 designations indicate. I'm not as well read on trains themselves as I should be. No problem. I believe the designations are simply names used by Metro to distinguish orders of trains. The Breda order was P2550. The post-Breda order (never solicited) was P3000, and the latest order is P3010. I'll see if I can find anything else on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Mar 8, 2011 16:07:47 GMT -8
Thanks for the great detail, though I'm curious what the P3000 and P3100 designations indicate. I'm not as well read on trains themselves as I should be. No problem. I believe the designations are simply names used by Metro to distinguish orders of trains. The Breda order was P2550. The post-Breda order (never solicited) was P3000, and the latest order is P3010. I'll see if I can find anything else on the subject. Okay, gotcha. Thanks for the info. I thought it might have had to do with the trains themselves, as opposed to internal Metro purchase designations. No need to dig any further on my account, but thanks for the offer.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 8, 2011 19:07:10 GMT -8
Thanks for the great detail, though I'm curious what the P3000 and P3100 designations indicate. I'm not as well read on trains themselves as I should be. No problem. I believe the designations are simply names used by Metro to distinguish orders of trains. The Breda order was P2550. The post-Breda order (never solicited) was P3000, and the latest order is P3010. I'll see if I can find anything else on the subject. Essentially it's the RFP number and I imagine that the "P" stands for procurement. It's fairly standard to refer to train models by RFP designation. In NYC they have R1, R9, etc all the way up to the newer trains which are R-160. I think that the "R" is requisition, but I'm not certain.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Mar 8, 2011 19:22:58 GMT -8
Here are two blurry drive-by photos from this evening, still worth posting. Steel frames have been attached to the side of the La Cienega bridge, seemingly as railings and to attach some sort of panels. And per the new Expo construction notice, storm drain and track removal work is being done on Jefferson Blvd. between La Cienega and Ballona Creek. One westbound lane and no eastbound lanes are open. On the LRV topic, I heard last week that all but the last three or so Breda cars have finally been delivered. I previously understood that that will free up the Gold Line Siemens cars for use on the Blue / Expo Lines.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 8, 2011 20:42:24 GMT -8
Here are some more Expo pics. First the view from Expo Construction Authority offices conference room, 34th Floor of the building at Wilshire and Hope: Washington and Flower intersection as of Friday: A mysterious rail crossing at the 23rd St Station: A drive-by of the benches at Vermont Station: A monster train near Farmdale. What is it? How come my picture at Ballona Creek came out much better than yours, Darrell? Darrell's shot:
|
|
|
Post by transitfan on Mar 9, 2011 6:37:08 GMT -8
No problem. I believe the designations are simply names used by Metro to distinguish orders of trains. The Breda order was P2550. The post-Breda order (never solicited) was P3000, and the latest order is P3010. I'll see if I can find anything else on the subject. Essentially it's the RFP number and I imagine that the "P" stands for procurement. It's fairly standard to refer to train models by RFP designation. In NYC they have R1, R9, etc all the way up to the newer trains which are R-160. I think that the "R" is requisition, but I'm not certain. I always thought that the NYC "R" stood for Rapid (Transit), but you may be right. At NY MTA, R-numbers are also issued for maintenance of way equipment/work equipment, as well as parts for ordered cars, which is why there are usually gaps in between car orders (R-160-->R-143, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 9, 2011 7:48:00 GMT -8
In looking at both Alex's video (great footage BTW!) and the more recent pictures, it has me wondering about the wavy station canopies. I seem to remember some discussion a while back that while the decorative canopies didn't provide rain protection, that there would be some kind of additional covering added that would work along with the current ones. In the video and pictures I see no indication of any additional covering being added. I don't recall reading anything recently in the Expo monthly status reports either. Anybody know whats going on?
RT
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Mar 9, 2011 9:02:09 GMT -8
In some of the renderings you will see what looks like a plexiglass shield under one section of the canopy. My understanding is the fire inspector is hesitating on approval of that material as it could melt and cause severe burns in a fire. Expo is determining what to do - either ensuring the material is UL approved or changing it out for something else.
Once that's resolved, something will be going in, but it could be added very quickly by one crew on all of the stations.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 9, 2011 9:25:55 GMT -8
A mysterious rail crossing at the 23rd St Station: That is the station's south entrance. Pedestrians will enter from the west side of the street (next to the building) and cross the northbound track as they enter. They will then proceed north into the station, between the two tracks. Note the two blue fences between the tracks. They channel pedestrians between the tracks to the station platform. As for the two crossbucks, they are there to warn riders leaving the station when a train is coming.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 9, 2011 9:40:43 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 9, 2011 13:53:13 GMT -8
I had figured that out but this pedestrian crossing looks really out of place. It seems to be in the middle of a street and there are no marks and nothing to make the pedestrians to use this point for the entry instead of several yards further south along the tracks.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 9, 2011 15:06:00 GMT -8
I had figured that out but this pedestrian crossing looks really out of place. It seems to be in the middle of a street and there are no marks and nothing to make the pedestrians to use this point for the entry instead of several yards further south along the tracks. To me the big issue is the sidewalk along Flower Street east of the tracks. If there will be an active sidewalk for the entire stretch between 23rd Street and Adams (and that's a big if), I would expect to see a fence along that entire length, separating the tracks from the sidewalk.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 12, 2011 12:56:37 GMT -8
If you haven't seen this already, Metro is saying that they are "targeting" to open Expo Line Phase 1 on November 15, 2011. See Page 2 of this document. There is only one football game in the Coliseum after this day, against UCLA on November 26. Note that we also know that the lines open on Sundays, not Tuesdays; so, November 15 is approximate at best. No word on where to but I'm guessing to La Cienega, possibly with Farmdale included.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 12, 2011 18:20:27 GMT -8
Wasn't that just put in there for budgeting reasons. It's a "best guess" scenario. I think Metro really has no clue on an opening day, but they had to get the FY2012 budget ready, and November 15, 2011 just falls near the 1st half of the middle of first fiscal year. Anyways, the big thing from the document is that Metro is projecting an increase of 44,257 revenue service hours for rail on EXISTING lines (not Expo). More specifically, by subtracting the 68,892 of revenue service hours for Expo Phase I from the light rail increase of 77,470 you end up with 8,578 additional hours for the existing three light rail lines. Meanwhile heavy rail (the Red and Purple Lines) are to get a 13.1% increase of an additional 33,680 revenue service hours. Read for yourself: www.metro.net/board/Items/2011/03_March/20110316F&BItem7.pdfDo you think Metro is increasing headways on Red & Purple for better connections between 7th Metro and Union Station due to the stub end of Blue & Expo at 7th? Late night service? Is the Blue Line going to increase headways - maybe b/c most of '11 they were at 30 minute headways between 8:30 pm - 12 pm due to Expo construction?
|
|
|
Post by carter on Mar 12, 2011 23:10:25 GMT -8
Do you think Metro is increasing headways on Red & Purple for better connections between 7th Metro and Union Station due to the stub end of Blue & Expo at 7th? Late night service? Is the Blue Line going to increase headways - maybe b/c most of '11 they were at 30 minute headways between 8:30 pm - 12 pm due to Expo construction? All of these certainly would make sense. Especially with another 10K or so new riders coming into Metro/7th station starting day one, I imagine a lot will be transferring to the Red & Purple lines. Though I don't take the subway much during rush hour, my impression is that another 10K could not be too easily absorbed with existing capacity, so another train per hour during peak hours would make sense. You could also add another car or two to the Purple Line, which seems to run pretty short trains from Western to LAUS.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 13, 2011 1:56:48 GMT -8
If you haven't seen this already, Metro is saying that they are "targeting" to open Expo Line Phase 1 on November 15, 2011. See Page 2 of this document. There is only one football game in the Coliseum after this day, against UCLA on November 26. That's a huge understatement. That's like saying "there's only one Loch Ness Monster". Sure, and it's big and legendary around these parts ;D
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 13, 2011 12:58:17 GMT -8
Using a standard 5-month-long train testing, Expo should be able to open in late August. The substantial completion is also set for late May. I'm not sure why they are saying mid November. Farmdale could be the reason. It looks like USC and UCLA folks will get a peek of the monster emerging off the Loch Expo, USC trench that is.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 13, 2011 13:09:42 GMT -8
A lot of street paving is going on. The line is almost getting into its final shape now. The fences are disappearing and leafless young trees are appearing in the landscaping strips. Farmdale Station platforms are finished. The yellow ADA tiles, necessary for the first train testing for platform clearances to start, are not installed yet. OCS work still continues, apparently mostly for the power-feeder cables. Never-ending utility work still continues. Apparently Plexiglas panels will be installed on the aerial stations. Birds will not be happy about these: A sunset view of the La Cienega Station: Close-up: The big day is this Friday, when Expo Phase 2 will start.
|
|
K 22
Full Member
Posts: 117
|
Post by K 22 on Mar 14, 2011 9:19:18 GMT -8
The big day is this Friday, when Expo Phase 2 will start. Nice that there's a bit of a head start with Phase 2. Is that also going to open in segments when the time comes?
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 14, 2011 9:24:30 GMT -8
Is that also going to open in segments when the time comes? It will open all at once to Santa Monica in early 2015. It can't be opened in segments, as it wasn't studied in the EIR.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 14, 2011 15:01:34 GMT -8
Phase 2 is a bit shorter than Phase 1 anyways, so I can't imagine where Phase 2.5, if such a thing existed, would end.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 14, 2011 17:14:44 GMT -8
Phase 2 is a bit shorter than Phase 1 anyways, so I can't imagine where Phase 2.5, if such a thing existed, would end. Ideally it would turn south toward Venice and then Marina Del Rey and Inglewood, to connect with the ATSF/BNSF Harbor Subdvision/Green Line, as its predecessor Air Line did. But, unfortunately, the freeway off ramp at the end of the station platform is making this very difficult.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 14, 2011 19:16:17 GMT -8
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears Phase II has more work involved than Phase I. For example, there are still businesses along the ROW between Pico/Gateway and Olympic/Centinela (Phase I didn't have this). When are they going to move out? Also, there are more bridges to be built with Phase II than Phase I like Sepulveda (probably will happen just like how the design options eventually were built in Phase I), Bundy, Pico/Gateway, Centinela and 26th/Cloverfield. I just cannot see this line opening in 2015. 2016 sounds way more reasonable.
I remember when Expo/Metro did the ceremonial groundbreaking in 2006 and the whole talk was a 2009 opening and looking at the site 1 year later in '07 and they were barely getting into the USC trench. I still highly feel that 2015 is too optimistic and will not happen...unless we see some significant dirt movement THIS YEAR and not 2012.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Mar 15, 2011 8:24:26 GMT -8
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears Phase II has more work involved than Phase I. For example, there are still businesses along the ROW between Pico/Gateway and Olympic/Centinela (Phase I didn't have this). When are they going to move out? Also, there are more bridges to be built with Phase II than Phase I like Sepulveda (probably will happen just like how the design options eventually were built in Phase I), Bundy, Pico/Gateway, Centinela and 26th/Cloverfield. I just cannot see this line opening in 2015. 2016 sounds way more reasonable. I remember when Expo/Metro did the ceremonial groundbreaking in 2006 and the whole talk was a 2009 opening and looking at the site 1 year later in '07 and they were barely getting into the USC trench. I still highly feel that 2015 is too optimistic and will not happen...unless we see some significant dirt movement THIS YEAR and not 2012. Actually, no, on the contrary, Phase 2 is substantially less involved. Also, the originally planned date for Phase 1 was July 1, 2010, not 2009. Here is the breakdown of the two phases: The bridges in Phase 1: I-110, La Brea, La Cienega, Ballona Creek road bridge, Ballona Creek LRT bridge, and Washington/National bridge. Total: 6. Bridges in Phase 2: Venice (already underway), National/Palms, Motor, Pico/Sawtelle, Bundy/Centinela, and Olympic. Total: 5.5 (Venice already underway). Tunnels in Phase 1: USC. Tunnels in Phase 2: none, therefore significant reduction in construction package. Aerial stations in Phase 1: La Brea, La Cienega, and Venice/Robertson. Total: 3 Aerial stations in Phase 2: Bundy. Total: 1 Mileage Phase 1: 8.7 Mileage Phase 2: 6.6 Tie-in in Phase 1: Blue Line Tie-in in Phase 2: None Existing-track rehabilitation in Phase 1: extensive, all the way to Washington Station. Existing-track rehabilitation in Phase 2: none Street-running segments in Phase 1: extensive, requiring extensive utility relocation and street reconstruction. Street-running segments in Phase 2: only 1 mile in Santa Monica. Legal troubles in Phase 1: Farmdale Legal troubles in Phase 2: none Utility-relocation problems in Phase 1: extensive Utility-relocation problems in Phase 1: none anticipated Phase 1 contractor: substandard and problematic. Phase 2 contractor: high-quality and proactive. Phase 1 storage facility: small but there were difficulties. Phase 2 maintenance facility: large. This is the only thing more involved in Phase 2 than in Phase 1. Businesses along Phase 2 are no problem. They are on a month-to-month lease in the Metro-owned right-of-way and they will start to go away as soon as the contract is awarded (this Friday).
|
|