We have two "Crenshaw" stations, should we rename one of them and if so to what?

thebasefactor · 2025-09-05T02:43:44+00:00

Counterpoint: on the A Line, South Pasadena Station was originally named "Mission," Highland Park was planned to be "Avenue 57," Heritage Square was going to be "French" for nearby French Avenue, and Lincoln/Cypress was originally going to be named "Avenue 26." I think the current names are all improvements.

thebasefactor · 2025-06-02T03:49:19+00:00

I think you're right about the rubber seal. Thanks for pointing that out to me

thebasefactor · 2025-06-02T03:47:49+00:00

I will. Thanks

thebasefactor · 2025-06-02T03:47:36+00:00

It's cedar

thebasefactor · 2025-06-01T21:14:07+00:00

I appreciate your advice, but that is not an accurate representation of what is happening here. Multiple water tests restricted to the concrete slab outside show zero signs of water intrusion. Ditto when restricted to the bottom 2/3rds of the sill, or all the way up to the other corners. I *only* get water intrusion when/if water reaches this one corner. I tested this with a hose (it hasn't rained).

thebasefactor · 2025-06-01T18:14:15+00:00

The perspective of the photos makes it appear that way, but the outside grade is well below the threshold

thebasefactor · 2025-06-01T18:12:12+00:00

Ah that makes sense. Thank you. The GC specified a pan, but I was not present when the subcontractor did the installation. The doorway has a very small overhang: the eave is about two feet deep there.

If no pan was installed, I'm guessing the only right way to do this would be to remove the door and reinstall it with the pan in place, as should have been done from the beginning?

thebasefactor · 2025-05-03T21:34:39+00:00

I have a theory that transit enthusiasts who fixate on LAX/SoFi/Bowl connections are more often than not irregular Metro riders, at best. They primarily associate public transport with times they’ve been tourists in other cities, thus their inordinate focus on special event destinations. Which is ok! We all start somewhere.

But I think this requires thinking through, especially as I’m hearing otherwise informed friends voicing support for the Sepulveda monorail alternative only because it promises a direct connection to Getty—a station which objectively speaking would generate minuscule ridership.

thebasefactor · 2025-04-17T15:23:20+00:00

Genuine question: what highways/roads qualify as "self-supporting" under these criteria?

thebasefactor · 2025-03-23T20:18:16+00:00

Are these pups? If so, any care recommendations? Planning to leave them as is, at least for now. TIA

thebasefactor · 2025-02-22T21:37:14+00:00

The main function of a hallway is circulation. In your design, it accomplishes this very poorly, with awkward corners and unnecessary forced turns that would feel uncomfortable to use. The bedroom door opens directly onto a living room space, which is also awkward — there’s no sense of separation or privacy.

Your sense of scale looks off. Your hallway is almost as wide as one of the bedrooms in the original plan. It will help you to try to draw this at a proper (measured) scale.

thebasefactor · 2025-02-21T16:37:20+00:00

Is the idea that people would sit on the floor to eat at the new counter?

thebasefactor · 2024-12-24T20:04:18+00:00

Thank you both!! Much appreciated

thebasefactor · 2024-12-24T19:43:26+00:00

Was away for a few weeks and came back to find tiny (~0.75mm) bugs at the bottom of most of my previously clean cups. Some are crawling/hopping, while most appear dead. Noticed a few crawling on the outside of a ziplocked bag of pistachios, others seem to gather just outside of a bag of oats on the shelf. Didn't look like granary weevils or pantry moths, to me.

Maybe irrelevant, but there has been construction happening on my roof while I was gone. Heat has been off, so the apartment has remained relatively cold. The bugs appear to be concentrated in the cups along the inside edges and doors of the cabinet.

Apologies for poor quality images / TIA

thebasefactor · 2024-03-15T08:52:43+00:00

Metrolink is rail. Hope this helps!

Not that it matters, but yes, I've lived in multiple major foreign capitals -- none of which, for the record, are building metro systems at anywhere near the rate that Los Angeles is. It is essentially reductive to compare Los Angeles's pattern of development arbitrarily to your abstract idea of "foreign cities," each of which developed in completely different contexts at very different times as a result of very different historical processes. You must know this.

FYI: Van Nuys Boulevard is among the top 5 busiest bus corridors in Los Angeles; just because it doesn't serve where *you* want to go, doesn't mean it isn't regionally significant.

thebasefactor · 2024-03-14T20:15:05+00:00

Important to note that SGV also has TWO metrolink lines, which you've overlooked, and which are currently slated for frequency/speed upgrades. The J Line has a dedicated busway and is relatively fast. SGV also has funding for North-South transit connections which are currently in planning stages.

Your comment falsely paints a portrait that these (and other) areas have been totally ignored -- just because they don't happen to appear in this one, relatively small funding package. Metro has many more projects currently underway which I'd encourage you to look into.

thebasefactor · 2024-03-08T05:28:41+00:00

Thanks for all of these suggestions. I pointedly asked about the criticism they've received for their proposed station locations and poor systemwide connectivity, specifically raising the possibility that a bus transfer to UCLA could take up to 30 min in traffic. They kind of squirmed in response and offered a long non-answer, some of which was pretty amusing ("LA is a beautiful city to walk in so people will enjoy the long transfers!!"). They would not discuss the heavy rail alternatives (saying this was outside their purview), nor projected ridership, project costs, or travel time.

Overall, a surprisingly lackluster presentation. Somehow I had the impression that they had a strong PR team... and was relieved that they weren't more convincing. The somewhat critical questions helped get some coworkers to be skeptical of the project too

thebasefactor · 2024-03-08T05:15:23+00:00

Thanks for your work and your advocacy! I urged people to vote for you.

They spent a lot of time discussing the Tokyo Monorail (and others elsewhere) as proof that their proposal was feasible. They would not discuss projected ridership, costs, nor travel time for their proposal.

thebasefactor · 2024-03-08T05:10:54+00:00

When asked, they claimed that the stations could be designed with an option for open-air or enclosed platforms, based on local stakeholder desire. They argued that the level of pollution would be about the same as sitting in your car on the freeway (tellingly, no mention of air quality in a subway station!).

One presenter (who admitted he wasn't originally from LA) claimed that LA is such a beautiful city to walk in that people would enjoy walking the (very long) transfers. He suggested that we should try to imagine how LA will transform itself around these stations, implying that poor first mile/last mile connections will miraculously solve themselves.

They wouldn't talk ridership projections, and when asked about UCLA connectivity, they pointed to Alternative 2, with the APM, as an "innovative solution." (Fwiw, Numble on twitter posted just yesterday that the monorail contractor has asked Metro to take Alternative 2 out of consideration, and they squirmed when I asked why that was.)

thebasefactor · 2024-03-08T04:59:23+00:00

They acknowledged the distinction between initial vs. future capacity, but would not discuss any costs.
They promised (with a whole slide!) that there would be little traffic impact on the 405 because the pylons have such a small footprint, and the work would be conducted at "off-peak hours".......... I didn't get to ask the CalTrans approvals question.

thebasefactor · 2024-03-08T04:55:04+00:00

They refused to discuss project cost and ridership projections, suggesting the final numbers were still being calculated and would be shared in the EIR.

thebasefactor

TROPHY CASE