West LA Transit Center is already being downgraded, since 217's now continue to La Cienega station except at night. The 534 could terminate in downtown Culver City, but it would break conenctions with the local east-west service on the 35, 37, and 38, and north south service on the 217. In any event, it will likely be eliminated when Phase II opens anyway. The 780 could also probably be extended to the Expo Line. Operationally the 35 and 38 are considered one loop route.
534 will go away once Expo phase 2 opens? They'll still need the Santa Monica-Trancas portion. I guess they'll truncate it to Santa Monica and renumber, since it will no longer be an express route. Wonder what the numbering will be (don't know if that's considered an east-west or north-south route). Maybe MTA will just dump the whole mess onto Big Blue Bus
West LA Transit Center is already being downgraded, since 217's now continue to La Cienega station except at night. The 534 could terminate in downtown Culver City, but it would break conenctions with the local east-west service on the 35, 37, and 38, and north south service on the 217. In any event, it will likely be eliminated when Phase II opens anyway. The 780 could also probably be extended to the Expo Line. Operationally the 35 and 38 are considered one loop route.
534 will go away once Expo phase 2 opens? They'll still need the Santa Monica-Trancas portion. I guess they'll truncate it to Santa Monica and renumber, since it will no longer be an express route. Wonder what the numbering will be (don't know if that's considered an east-west or north-south route). Maybe MTA will just dump the whole mess onto Big Blue Bus
I hope they keep it around, unless the ridership falls off which could happen with the Express up charge, because it's going to remain faster than the Exposition Line to Santa Monica regardless as there are no intermediate stops between Culver City Station and Colorado/4th Santa Monica.
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5477 on Jun 18, 2012, 11:39am »
The 534 will indeed be shortened and maybe even given to Santa Monica as there will be no need to replicate the Expo Line route from CC to Santa Monica.
I can see the BBB #10 being eliminated right when Expo Line opens to Santa Monica. Wasn't there a freeway express between Long Beach and Downtown LA until the Blue Line opened? Same thing will happen with Expo Line/ Line #10.
I wonder how the ridership on the F Dash is doing now with the Expo Line open. It's the same route replicated, but obviously with less stops on Dash than Expo Line, but much longer service hours. I think LADOT should cancel the F Dash and use those resources for another service (maybe late night service between South Park and Little Tokyo via Old Bank District?)
West LA Transit Center is already being downgraded, since 217's now continue to La Cienega station except at night. The 534 could terminate in downtown Culver City, but it would break conenctions with the local east-west service on the 35, 37, and 38, and north south service on the 217. In any event, it will likely be eliminated when Phase II opens anyway. The 780 could also probably be extended to the Expo Line. Operationally the 35 and 38 are considered one loop route.
534 will go away once Expo phase 2 opens? They'll still need the Santa Monica-Trancas portion. I guess they'll truncate it to Santa Monica and renumber, since it will no longer be an express route. Wonder what the numbering will be (don't know if that's considered an east-west or north-south route). Maybe MTA will just dump the whole mess onto Big Blue Bus
Good question...
I think Metro will consider it east-west so it will be 134. Although that could be misleading because the corridor serviced is well north of 130 (Artesia Blvd).
BBB probably wouldn't want it since BBB9 is already one of the poorest performing line in their system.
I can see the BBB #10 being eliminated right when Expo Line opens to Santa Monica. Wasn't there a freeway express between Long Beach and Downtown LA until the Blue Line opened? Same thing will happen with Expo Line/ Line #10.
That'll be Santa Monica's call. What Line 10 has in its favor is that a lot of its ridership is coming from Santa Monica College. The buses can go from empty to standing room only just before it gets on the freeway.
The express service to Long Beach ended because it was an RTD route. Torrance and Gardena kept their downtown express buses long after the Blue Line opened, and didn't just shift riders over to the Blue Line once it opened. Montebello has kept its 340s lines after the Gold Line came to East L.A.
BBB probably wouldn't want it since BBB9 is already one of the poorest performing line in their system.
A direct line to Malibu via PCH and the winding route of BBB9 are not exactly the same thing.
I'm wondering how much further west on PCH the 534 could travel and still have any ridership? If the express section between Santa Monica and Fairfax, would that allow former-534 to go further west without increasing service hours? Or would more frequency on the remaining portion be better?
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5481 on Jun 19, 2012, 11:59am »
I've taken the BBB#10 from SM to the LA Civic Center when doing jury duty, and I have to say I would still be inclined to take it after Expo Line Phase 2 opens, if it's still available. The BBB stops on SM Blvd are a lot closer to where I live than Bergamot Station, #10 stops right in front of the Criminal Courts building in downtown LA, and I would have to switch trains at 7th St./Metro Center until the Downtown Connector is completed. The slow times for the Expo Line on Flower St. are also a drag.
Joined: Jan 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 194 Location: Los Angeles
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5482 on Jun 19, 2012, 2:31pm »
I agree, having taken BBB #10 from Ocean to 7th/Olive in 30 minutes, there's still going to be a crowd for the Express bus. Express buses and rail can coexist, with express buses getting their quickly and for a little extra in cost factors nicely into the choices that are made available to the riding public. I rather have a choice to ride the Expo Line or the BBB #10 on top of options to drive or take a taxi.
Joined: Jan 2012 Gender: Male Posts: 19 Location: Palms
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5483 on Jun 19, 2012, 9:44pm »
I really wish they would open the Culver City station at the start of the day. I'm actually in a position to take Expo tomorrow but need to catch the 6:59-ish train out, so I'll basically miss out on starting at a fully-functional station. It especially stinks because, coming back, I'll have to get off "early" at La Cienega to get my scooter.
Speaking of which, where's the best spot for scooter parking in that garage? Parking with the bikes seems off, but taking up a whole car spot isn't right either.
"There are no buildings that have been built by chance, remote from the human society where they have grown and its needs, hopes and understandings..."
Joined: Jun 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 380 Location: Montréal, QC (Canada)
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5484 on Jun 20, 2012, 5:24am »
Metro has a public relations problem and, it seems, severe operational problems. Today's Los Angeles Times article details some of them - is it still being run like this? Forty minute delays? What gives?
Expo Line's halting start (link) If mass transit is to succeed in Los Angeles, the MTA is going to have to get its act together.
"We drove to the La Cienega station, parked in the free Metro lot adjacent to the track and bought our tickets. But instead of a train every 12 minutes or so, as promised on MTA's schedule, we waited 25 minutes for the train, without explanation from the Metro staffers on the platform. When the train did arrive, 15 or so of us sat inside for another 20 minutes, again without a word from the driver..."
Metro has a public relations problem and, it seems, severe operational problems. Today's Los Angeles Times article details some of them - is it still being run like this? Forty minute delays? What gives?
Expo Line's halting start (link) If mass transit is to succeed in Los Angeles, the MTA is going to have to get its act together.
"We drove to the La Cienega station, parked in the free Metro lot adjacent to the track and bought our tickets. But instead of a train every 12 minutes or so, as promised on MTA's schedule, we waited 25 minutes for the train, without explanation from the Metro staffers on the platform. When the train did arrive, 15 or so of us sat inside for another 20 minutes, again without a word from the driver..."
I was there that day, there were signaling problems between LaBrea and LaCienega with a westbound train stopped at the Hauser crossing. There was a truck and some workers parked in front of the train at Hauser too. Eventually they sent out an advisory for Expo trains to turn back at LaBrea. I think I took a bus back from Culver City on the return trip. Would be nice if they used those big nice LED screens to tell you when the next train is coming or to report on service advisories.
Honestly, I think the Red Line is a worse offender of timeliness and communication, I've missed maybe a half dozen Metrolink/Amtrak trains in the last month of commuting to work due to the Red Line's delays, stop and go while pulling into Union Station, or dwelling at stations for minutes waiting on a stalled or broken down trains. It happened as recently as Monday early evening.
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5487 on Jun 20, 2012, 4:22pm »
I took a break this afternoon to check out the Expo Park/USC station at about 5:00 pm, as I periodically do, and there were a lot more people waiting for the train, particularly on the WB platform, than I've seen previously at this time of day. The EB train that came through also seemed to have more riders. I didn't think opening the Culver City station would make much difference to USC ridership until fall classes started, but at least for the first day it appears to have had an immediate effect.
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5488 on Jun 20, 2012, 4:22pm »
Yes, they opened. There were already a fair number of people from Culver City on the train when I got on at La Cienega. 1 person got off, no one got on (in my car at least) at Farmdale.
My car actually had people standing for the first time I have ever seen, at least into 7th/Metro Center.
Unfortunately, the Venice Boulevard side of the Culver City Station entrance will be closed until Phase 2 is completed (at least until the Venice Blvd bridge is completed). This makes access very difficult. Access on the Venice Blvd side is currently provided from Exposition Blvd, which is now the parking-lot driveway. There are no signs pointing to the station access or to the Downtown Culver City access.
That begs the question of why wasn't a bus terminal included with the design of the station?
I got an answer at the opening from a Culver CityBus representative. I later found out it was Art Ida, the director!
The agencies did look at a potential bus transit center at Culver City, but it turns out that the odd angles of the streets and the existing buildings on the west and north sides precluded an off-street transit center. A properly designed center would have needed the whole block given to Expo, mainly because buses must avoid making obtuse-angle (135 degree) turns.
And a ring of bus layover parking spots on the street was ruled out. Businesses don't want idled buses blocking their storefronts. Also, the biggest problem would have been from Metro, because it runs the most and the highest frequency lines.
Joined: Jul 2009 Posts: 230 Location: North Hollywood, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5491 on Jun 21, 2012, 8:19am »
I rode the line again yesterday from Culver City. It was definitely the best ride so far in terms of speed...up until after 23rd Street. The Flower Street section is still painfully, painfully slow. We spent six minutes just sitting there until finally an announcer came on the speaker saying that they were experiencing a delay. As we went by, I noticed a Blue Line train sitting at Grand Station. They probably both arrived at the same time and were having trouble figuring out which train should leave first.
When we finally arrived at 7th Street, the entire ride was 33 minutes. Had the delay not occurred, the train would have been right on time.
I'm happy the Expo Line finally exists in its complete form, but they need to get Flower Street under control and soon.
On the plus side, I did notice a lot more people riding yesterday. The new stations and improved bus connections combined with speculators wanting to ride to the new stations seems to have beefed up the ridership. With all that and the added events from all the L.A. Kings excitement in the last few weeks, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw the ridership double from the previous numbers.
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 3,995 Location: Palms, LA, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5493 on Jun 21, 2012, 12:14pm »
Observations today:
Only one person boarded my train at Farmdale -- a well-dressed, middle-aged neighborhood lady.
Some of the La Cienega park-and-rides already have shifted to Culver City. There were about 150 cars parked at Culver City (running about 1/3 full) and about half came from La Cienega. I expect more people parking at La Cienega to move to Culver City in the next weeks.
Culver City Station has quite decent ridership as a start, already more than at La Cienega. I estimate the current ridership at around 15,000.
One of the Siemens P2000 trains was disabled again and was parked at the Culver City platform (south side), delaying the service a bit.
Regarding the new Blue Bus transit center: It is at Robertson a couple of hundred yards south of the station, about a three-minute walk from the station.
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5494 on Jun 21, 2012, 2:50pm »
I rode yesterday and it was super fast: 26 minutes from CC to DTLA--we only hit one light, I believe right before Pico station. I guess right now, it's simply luck of the draw.
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 3,995 Location: Palms, LA, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5495 on Jun 21, 2012, 5:54pm »
Operational frustrations continue and the line is not quite ready for the prime time.
During rush hour this evening, they were shuttling a train back and forth between Culver City and La Cienega, with the LA train making its last stop at La Cienega. This was due to the Hayden switch malfunctioning. Culver City being the second-busy station along the alignment (after 7th/Metro), this was inconvenient for many.
At the elevated La Cienega Station, the operator accidentally opened the doors on the outer side. This left the first-time riders in awe when they almost stepped into zero gravity and 30-ft down below through widely spaced rods on the outer side of the bridge.
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5496 on Jun 21, 2012, 7:56pm »
No operational problems after 7:30 pm. I took the Expo Line from CC station to Farmdale. CC had about 20 people boarding around 7:30 pm (good for a 2nd day opening) and me and 1 other bicyclist deboarded at Farmdale. The ride between CC and La Cienega/Jefferson is very good and fast. Surprised they gave it 3 min on the Metro timetable though. Think it should be reduced to 2 minutes in December schedules.
Farmdale was interesting. As I said, only one other bicyclist got off with me. I stayed there to catch the next train back to CC (about a 20 minute wait as I just missed the westbound train). During the 20 minutes, not a single person boarded my eastbound train, which I departed, not a single person walked onto the EB or WB platform, not a single person boarded the next EB train and I was the ONLY person who boarded the WB train at Farmdale.
Will Farmdale be the lowest passenger station in the entire Metro system?
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5497 on Jun 21, 2012, 8:00pm »
I was watching the KTLA 5 report on the opening of the Expo Line and was pleasantly surprised with the last few minutes of the report where the Anchorman suggested to the reporter that she take the Expo Line to 7th and then transfer to the Red Line so she could return to the studio in Hollywood. Metro Rail is slowly becoming part of the local vernacular like other big city urban rail systems.
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 3,995 Location: Palms, LA, CA
Re: Exposition Light Rail Line Project Development « Reply #5498 on Jun 21, 2012, 9:01pm »
From my train, 5 people got off at Farmdale during evening rush hour, which I thought was very good for the second day. I think we will see significant ridership at Farmdale once people realize it's now open. Dorsey alone should add at least 500 a day.
I never forget when the line first opened, one guy asked if Farmdale was open and got off when he was told no. So, yes, some people will (even exclusively) use this station.
I wish they will get rid of the idiotic overkill 10 MPH speed limit at Farmdale though.
I came across an anti-Expo article yesterday. Two writers counted passengers for two days during the first week of service and concluded that the train won't break even for 65 years! What morons!
The clips that accompany the article show only empty platforms and trains; but things have been a lot busier than that on the three random occasions I've ridden the line. In this case it may have been intentional, but I've noticed generally that video clips of this system, even the ones made by people who have no particular beef with transit spending. Undoubtedly it's the easiest time to get a good shot of the trains and platforms, but I can't help being bothered by the fact that this makes most pictures remind me of what McArthur Park Station must have looked like the second day it was open.
I came across an anti-Expo article yesterday. Two writers counted passengers for two days during the first week of service and concluded that the train won't break even for 65 years! What morons!
The clips that accompany the article show only empty platforms and trains; but things have been a lot busier than that on the three random occasions I've ridden the line. In this case it may have been intentional, but I've noticed generally that video clips of this system, even the ones made by people who have no particular beef with transit spending. Undoubtedly it's the easiest time to get a good shot of the trains and platforms, but I can't help being bothered by the fact that this makes most pictures remind me of what McArthur Park Station must have looked like the second day it was open.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Calendar]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/calendar.gif "[Calendar]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
Author
Logged![[avatar]](http://i657.photobucket.com/albums/uu296/agentsmithone/2245349939_5ff1f797e6_t.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://megancase.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/metro-current-scheme.gif "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/LAMTA.png "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://physics.usc.edu/Undergraduate/temporary/PE_logo.png "[avatar]"){kind=logo}
![[image]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/Metro_Expo_Line_Culver_City_Station.JPG/800px-Metro_Expo_Li ne_Culver_City_Station.JPG "[image]")
![[avatar]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v337/bdowns/avatars/phillies_logo_p.gif "[avatar]"){kind=logo}
So, yes, some people will (even exclusively) use this station.![[yim]](http://images.proboards.com/yim.gif "[yim]")
