[bradchris]

Some of this was covered in the article, but it’s not actually Los Angeles’ leadership’s fault (rare praise for a city I love and call home), it was shovel-ready and funded to be built in the 80s. Then there was a ballot measure due to ongoing construction problems of a separate line in the 80s that banned tunneling in Los Angeles. This wasn’t overturned until 2007! Then Beverly Hills (which is also not part of Los Angeles city government) fought this line for another 10 years, again with tunneling concerns, because they didn’t want it under them (not so fun fact, Doug Emhoff, Kamala Harris’ husband, represented them). It went to the California Supreme Court and then the Federal Appeals Court, and finally, in 2017 was allowed to commence construction. Then Beverly Hills decided they wanted (and got) not one but TWO stops (and the only ones outside of downtown with turnstiles). Funny.

An indictment of the state legal system’s slowness, yes (see CAHSR), but the city consistently has fought many of its own nimby residents, other cities, the state, and the United States trying to claw back funding for this for those 60 years. It would not have been built without generations of support from city leadership. So there is hope!

With hundreds of miles funded and planned for or already under construction in the next two decades, the city’s rail future may be the brightest in the country.

[rayiner]

In Spain and France, once the legislature approves a transit project, it preempts all other laws and is very difficult to litigate out of existence. Lawsuits cripple our ability to build infrastructure.

[yieldcrv]

The US constitution’s supremacy clause allows for this too

But because higher governments derive their existence from the support of the lower governments, laws are frequently written to allow opt in by lower governments

California very commonly inverts the supremacy relationship

Municipal level governments don’t practice the county’s laws unless they opt in, and don’t practice many of the states laws unless they opt in

Exceptions apply

[rayiner]

A lot of the burden is from federal requirements (NEPA and the APA) that subject every government action to endless litigation. In Spain and France, the laws authorizing transit projects also bar challenges under many corresponding national laws. The idea is that the government has made the decision to do something after extended consideration, and that's that.

[rcbdev]

Yes, it is this way in most European countries where public transit infrastructure works.

[Slow_Hand]

Glad to hear it.

An underground K-Line extension was recently approved to go through my neighborhood. This is after a small handful of 2-3 homeowners caused it to be delayed by 18 months over objections that seismic activity from drilling would be noticeable under their homes.

The city spent a year doing a study and report to appease the concerns of these residents, who - when presented with this extensive report showing that it would NOT be noticeable - proceeded to disregard the opinion of the city engineers and continue blocking it with the help of the Mayor, who is a friend.

Thankfully their objections were finally outvoted. West Hollywood had put up several billion in matching funds to pay for the extension, and if things had continued to drag on, the offer would have expired and jeopardized the entire project.

[bradchris]

Exactly. This line was actually planned for in the approved Measure M Ballot Measure in 2016 to be “shovel ready” [environmentally cleared, funding identified, etc] by 2022, with optimistic projections hoping construction would be finished by 2028. Clearly, we’re at least 6 years behind schedule, considering the final funding votes and route design specifics won’t be set until then, much less construction. It was not a surprise, so I consider any further delays on that front by detractors to be in bad faith, and I am happy that Metro has started to put its foot down and force progress, albeit I wish they would have done so sooner.

Nevertheless, I think it’s a good sign of government inertia that we won’t run into a 60 year delay ever again, especially as Metro prepares to finalize approval of the Sepulveda Pass Subway from LAX to the Valley.

[mmooss]

> West Hollywood had put up several billion

West Hollywood has several billion dollars? To spare?

[bradchris]

via a 75-year EIFD, which the city successfully lobbied the state to change California law to allow them to enact. Talk about city support!

It may not look like it, but most residents in LA are literally begging for an option to navigate the city that is not car-bound. Cost isn’t even a concern at this point, for better or worse, it’s just the current situation of 30 min traffic to drive 3 miles at rush hour is untenable in a region that is about 50 miles in each direction. And WeHo has no direct highway access anywhere, so they’re really feeling the brunt of it.

[lapetitejort]

While all of this in happening, Metrolink, the rail service that connects LA, Orange, San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties, is having their own budget crisis manifesting in "temporary" reductions in service. More info: https://calelectricrail.org/metrolink-is-facing-service-cuts...

[bradchris]

Metrolink’s multi-county governance structure bums me out, as a majority of them are actively against expanding it, improving it, or even funding it. At least Metro has Los Angeles in control of a majority of the votes to squash any anti-transit shenanigans on what is supposed to be an organization tasked with expanding transit. Metrolink has no such mechanism to protect itself from the inside.

[the_real_cher]

Thanks for this awesome explanation!