Garcetti thinks a monorail over the 405 Freeway could tame traffic gridlock (Los Angeles: crime, construction)

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by nmnita

let me say a couple of things about a mono rail: it might have worked if it had been started, like some say, 30 or 40 years ago, but for those who were not in Los Angeles that many years ago; traffic in So.Ca. has always been a night mare. I know it is much worse now, but it seems like every attempt to solve the problem is costing more money and not working. Even in the 50s when living what seemed like miles from downtown a public transit system was always the issue.
Couldn't the money that would be spent on a rapid transit system of any kind be better spent on other problems facing So. Calif? I am not sure your mayor thinks with his whole brain. Now when does his re-election come up? I might move back just to vote against him.

Unfortunately he just got reelected in March for his second term. He gets a 5 1/2 term this time too unfortunately.. . Voter turnout was very low .

[SportyandMisty]

The issue is not the mode of alternate transportation; it is the cost to build it.

[SportyandMisty]

Regarding the cost to build a monorail:

The first New York City subway opened around 1900. Its price tag is the inflation-adjusted equivalent of $100 million/kilometer today. However, a new New York subway line being opened this year costs about $2.2 billion per kilometer, suggesting a cost increase of twenty times. Paris, Berlin, and Copenhagen subways cost about $250 million per kilometer, almost 90% less. Yet even those European subways are overpriced compared to Korea, where a kilometer of subway in Seoul costs $40 million/km (another Korean subway project cost $80 million/km). This is a difference of 50x between Seoul and New York for apparently comparable services.

I find subway costs particularly telling, because we're building 19th century technology using 21st century tools -- huge boring machines that dramatically cut costs. And other countries still know how to do it for costs orders of magnitude lower than ours.

Now -- tell me again how building a monorail is a good use of taxpayer dollars?

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Regarding the cost to build a monorail:

The first New York City subway opened around 1900. Its price tag is the inflation-adjusted equivalent of $100 million/kilometer today. However, a new New York subway line being opened this year costs about $2.2 billion per kilometer, suggesting a cost increase of twenty times. Paris, Berlin, and Copenhagen subways cost about $250 million per kilometer, almost 90% less. Yet even those European subways are overpriced compared to Korea, where a kilometer of subway in Seoul costs $40 million/km (another Korean subway project cost $80 million/km). This is a difference of 50x between Seoul and New York for apparently comparable services.

I find subway costs particularly telling, because we're building 19th century technology using 21st century tools -- huge boring machines that dramatically cut costs. And other countries still know how to do it for costs orders of magnitude lower than ours.

Now -- tell me again how building a monorail is a good use of taxpayer dollars?

This state of CA also spends $75,000 per prisoner per year due to high salaries and pension costs of prison employees .
Would be interesting to see what those countries spend on their prisons .
I'm guessing it's far less too .
Not up to looking it up right now though .

In America and especially a state like CA the taxpayer gets screwed . They pay more for less

There are also all kind of attorneys and others that make a fortune off regulations and laws that are written by other attorneys to keep them in business .

[Happy in L.A.]

Originally Posted by nmnita

let me say a couple of things about a mono rail: it might have worked if it had been started, like some say, 30 or 40 years ago, but for those who were not in Los Angeles that many years ago; traffic in So.Ca. has always been a night mare. I know it is much worse now, but it seems like every attempt to solve the problem is costing more money and not working. Even in the 50s when living what seemed like miles from downtown a public transit system was always the issue.
Couldn't the money that would be spent on a rapid transit system of any kind be better spent on other problems facing So. Calif? I am not sure your mayor thinks with his whole brain. Now when does his re-election come up? I might move back just to vote against him.

I must agree with you. SoCal traffic has always been bad. At least for the past 40 years. And I don't imagine it will improve a whole lot, even with our light rail ines and two subway lines. However, it does give people an option, and I like that. During the Women's March which took place in downtown LA a few months ago, over 550,000 people used public transit, mostly light rail and subway lines, to get to downtown LA.

It's not at all uncommon for people to use light rail and subway lines to get downtown for sporting events at Staples Center (Lakers, Clippers and Kings home games), Dodger Stadium, The LA Colisium (LA Rams, USC football), concerts at Nokia, Grand Park, LA State Historic Park, and Disney Concert Hall, or live theater at the Music Centers three venues and functions at the Convention Center. With all the new construction downtown, there are few places to park and when you find parking it costs an arm and a leg.

The Crenshaw light rail line will come into play in early 2019 and will connect downtown and the west side to LAX via the Green & Expo light rail lines. So although I agree traffic in LA hasn't improved much at all, at least we now have options and the Monorail will provide just one more option. Having said that, the existing MTA light rail and subway lines only serve communities in LA County (population 10 million) and don't cross over into Orange, San Bernardino, Ventura or Riverside County.

As for LA Mayor Garcetti, he's one of many LA county mayors on the MTA board which vote on planning and funding for future rail line projects in LA County. Although his opinions carry a lot of weight, without the support of other board members, his monorail idea doesn't stand a chance.

Ending on an interesting note. Just recently voters in LA County went to the polls and voted overwhelmingly in support of a sales tax increase to fund future transit project.

[Texamichiforniasota]

If a monorail is cheaper than a subway and travels at a similar speed, go for it. I don't think it will speed up commutes on the freeway, but people in the Valley and on the Westside would like more options for getting over the hill. I think it's good the city and Metro are looking at cheaper alternatives to solve the transit and traffic issues of the city.

On a side note, I think the previously proposed gondola ride from Universal to the Hollywood sign is also a sensible solution, though I realize it would probably never be built. It'd be a big tourist draw/trap, and it would get them out of hillside neighborhoods where they cause problems. I'm sure Universal would be open to an attraction that would fill their parking garages with customers and draw traffic to City Walk. The one downside is the cables and towers would take away a little from the natural serenity of the park, but compared to the traffic jams and tourists everywhere on the south side of the park currently, it would probably be an overall net plus for serenity in the park.

[Happy in L.A.]

At one time there was a proposal to use a gondola to take folks from the parking lots at the Zoo and Southwest Museum, up and over the hill to the Griffith Observatory. If it was advertised as a visit to the Observatory and view of the Hollywood sign, tourists and locals would flock to it. It would be a great source of revenue for the city too.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by jm1982

This state of CA also spends $75,000 per prisoner per year due to high salaries and pension costs of prison employees .
Would be interesting to see what those countries spend on their prisons .
I'm guessing it's far less too .
Not up to looking it up right now though .

In America and especially a state like CA the taxpayer gets screwed . They pay more for less

There are also all kind of attorneys and others that make a fortune off regulations and laws that are written by other attorneys to keep them in business .

My guess is there are several factors, including those high salaries and pension costs. I suspect in addition, we have layers and layers of bureaucrats who sit at desks in nice air conditioned offices spending their days creating PowerPoint presentations to give to other bureaucrats, and filling out paperwork that goes to a recipient who never looks at it but just sticks it in a filing cabinet... and then the State, to save money, buys a computerized document management system to scan those documents which no one ever looks at in the first place... and on and on and on.

[Xanathos]

Originally Posted by seain dublin

Thinking outside the box only does some good when you're actually going to act on those thoughts.

This isn't going to happen. First off where would the stations be? People would have to still drive to those stations.

Is UCLA going to give up some land or their parking lots for a stop or stops there?

How about all the disruption(adding to traffic issues) to even get it built?

I think Eric smokes a big bowl and than talks. Only logical explanation for what comes out of his mouth, especially the last few months.

Hey, I just moved from Seattle where, right after I left, they completely shut down 1/3 of the freeway capacity over Lake Washington AND tore down a busy park and ride for 10 years while they decide to build light rail that will already be outdated the day it starts.

Never underestimate the "what will the peasants do but complain?" strategy politicians love.

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Stay the course. Build out the existing subways, light rail and commuter rail, especially extensions. Expand the Metrolink schedule to make it more convenient for more riders.