Public transportation in California... (Los Angeles, San Bernardino: safer, train, commuter)

[vincenze]

Originally Posted by Luisito80

It is my understanding the purple D line is being extened west towards santa monica. After this project will LA every build another subway line? Or has the city decided on LRT only going forward?

Metro wants to build a line over or under the 405 freeway from Santa Monica to San Fernando Valley.

The Chinese propose a monorail, which will be cheaper.

[citizensadvocate]

Originally Posted by vincenze

Metro wants to build a line over or under the 405 freeway from Santa Monica to San Fernando Valley.

The Chinese propose a monorail, which will be cheaper.

They should had built the Purple line over ground instead of mothballing the project over methane gas pockets. Most metro systems would had went above ground in this situation including in NYC and China as its much cheaper to build than cut and cover.

[Luisito80]

Originally Posted by citizensadvocate

They should had built the Purple line over ground instead of mothballing the project over methane gas pockets. Most metro systems would had went above ground in this situation including in NYC and China as its much cheaper to build than cut and cover.

You make a good point. I am actually surprised LA hasn't built over ground sections of the subway. I think there are definitely many parts of the city where this could be done.

[citizensadvocate]

I be curious whether the Methane zone covers anything LaBrea tar pits and westward. I be curious why they didn't go above ground. If Beverely Hills woudn't want such a structure across/over their city why not just build right under its borders ie on Pico Blvd instead? Thus people who want to commute still have the benefits and still within walking distance of it as Pico Bl is merely four blocks south of Wilshire at the heart of BH without angering NIMBYist who only care about the looks that may be negatively affected should the structure be built through Beverely Hills.

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by vincenze

Metro wants to build a line over or under the 405 freeway from Santa Monica to San Fernando Valley.

The Chinese propose a monorail, which will be cheaper.

I'm pretty sure its going to be an underground subway. I think that and Vermont are close to confirmed.

Given that the Cahuenga Pass has had the most successful subway line in the western U.S. for a while now, I don't know why monorail was ever even considered for the Sepulveda Pass.

[Kings Gambit]

Originally Posted by citizensadvocate

They should had built the Purple line over ground instead of mothballing the project over methane gas pockets. Most metro systems would had went above ground in this situation including in NYC and China as its much cheaper to build than cut and cover.

Its much more cost effective to go underground. Even with Imminent Domain, the cost of above ground land is extremely prohibitive in Los Angeles. Takes a LOT longer to build underground, but it is definitely a LOT cheaper. Just look at the average price per square foot of homes in LA and especially along certain routes. Just one lot (i.e., one home) could be anywhere from $2m - $4m dollars.

[citizensadvocate]

Originally Posted by Kings Gambit

Its much more cost effective to go underground. Even with Imminent Domain, the cost of above ground land is extremely prohibitive in Los Angeles. Takes a LOT longer to build underground, but it is definitely a LOT cheaper. Just look at the average price per square foot of homes in LA and especially along certain routes. Just one lot (i.e., one home) could be anywhere from $2m - $4m dollars.

Interesting they cannot built it over existing road right of ways though just like whats done in many places of the world including NYC and Chicago. Even within LA itself, the recently built Expo line is built entirely above ground mostly along roads except for a small portion of downtown mostly along existing roads or towers over them without much affecting surrounding structures. Tunneling is very expensive. Otherwise we should have tunneled some of our roads in LA to reduce congestion and pollution above ground, DTLA has some of such tunneled roads they should do it west of downtown as well. I be curious why even with cut and cover Pasadena and south pasadena still will not accept the project arguing that it may still destroy too much of their city. I be curious whether south Pasadena would had disappeared off the map if 710 was built decades ago like it did everywhere else. I assume most freeway projects in greater LA was built without much resistance because most of those cities were mostly underdeveloped before the freeways were built and only experienced explosive growth we see today post freeway?

[Kings Gambit]

Originally Posted by citizensadvocate

Interesting they cannot built it over existing road right of ways though just like whats done in many places of the world including NYC and Chicago. Even within LA itself, the recently built Expo line is built entirely above ground mostly along roads except for a small portion of downtown mostly along existing roads or towers over them without much affecting surrounding structures. Tunneling is very expensive. Otherwise we should have tunneled some of our roads in LA to reduce congestion and pollution above ground, DTLA has some of such tunneled roads they should do it west of downtown as well.

What a lot of people who are not native Southern Californians are ignorant to is the fact that we have EARTHQUAKES and many fault lines here so there are a boatload of additional geological and environmental engineering studies that have to take place before just going all willy nilly and boring subway holes underground. NY, Chicago or older cities like Moscow doesnt have this problem. It would be cool if they could open up some of those old underground rail line tunnels that are closed off under DTLA and use them for subways. Really cool if they did that.

Another thing to remember is that Los Angeles is very very car culture oriented. Only people who actually take public transportation are poor people, immigrants, some students and thats about it (although there may be a few exceptions). Its because LA is so spread out and relatively "new" which makes it super unique compared to other cities. People who have kids or need to run errands, or go shopping just dont take any public transportation here. They DRIVE.

Originally Posted by citizensadvocate

I assume most freeway projects in greater LA was built without much resistance because most of those cities were mostly underdeveloped before the freeways were built and only experienced explosive growth we see today post freeway?

Maybe back in the 40s, 50s and 60s this could have been the case. I dont know. But I know for YEARS parts of the areas where they built the 105 going near LAX east through Hawthorn etc., many of the "imminent domain" homes were vacant and empty for years and years. I remember as a kid, teen and young adult going to the mall or beach and seeing all those vacant homes next to the Hawthorn Airport. Took them YEARS to build that fwy.

[vincenze]

Originally Posted by Kings Gambit

Another thing to remember is that Los Angeles is very very car culture oriented. Only people who actually take public transportation are poor people, immigrants, some students and thats about it (although there may be a few exceptions). Its because LA is so spread out and relatively "new" which makes it super unique compared to other cities. People who have kids or need to run errands, or go shopping just dont take any public transportation here. They DRIVE.

A new car with payments, insurance, maintenance, etc costs $400 and more per month.

If somebody works in Culver City, she can rent in Monrovia or she can rent closer to Culver City and near a bus station paying a few hundred dollars more.

[Luisito80]

Originally Posted by vincenze

Metro wants to build a line over or under the 405 freeway from Santa Monica to San Fernando Valley.

The Chinese propose a monorail, which will be cheaper.

Just read up on this proposed new RT route. I think it would be a HUGE mistake to go with the chinese monorail. Subway is still the best method of RT for many reasons. Cheaper does not mean better, a cheaper monorail could actually be more expensive in the long run.