Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 688 Location: Expo Park/Coliseum adjacent
Westside Extension Meetings « Thread Started on May 5, 2008, 1:54pm »
LA Daily News
Westside-Eastside subway could cost $6.5 billion Agency building support for line linking Westside By Sue Doyle, Staff Writer Article Last Updated: 05/05/2008 06:49:08 AM PDT
Plans to send a subway rumbling below Westside streets to link the traffic-choked region to Eastside rail lines have been narrowed to four possible routes estimated to cost up to $6.5 billion.
And even with no available funding source, Metro is forging ahead and preparing what it hopes will eventually be an attractive package to federal officials who have not offered any financial support for a subway beyond repealing a 1985 ban last year on federal money for construction under Wilshire Boulevard.
"There is a long way to go before the subway extension can become a reality," said Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, a Metro board member. "But building support for, and selecting, a preferred route is the prerequisite to the next difficult step - finding a way to pay its $450 million-per-mile cost."
Metro started with 17 proposals in February and narrowed them to four after nearly 800 residents attended a series of community meetings to voice their preferences. A fifth option of building a busway is also on the table. After the next two weeks of meetings, Metro will further narrow plans for a Westside extension and should present its findings to its board by the fall.
The 12-14-mile line would link with existing transit routes to bring commuters underground from downtown to Santa Monica. For San Fernando Valley commuters, a trip from the existing North Hollywood subway station to Century City would take about 28 minutes.
* One proposal would put a subway almost entirely under Wilshire Boulevard from the Purple Line at Wilshire and Western Avenue to the Pacific Ocean. It would swing around Century City, where thousands of daily passenger boardings could rival Union Station, said Jody Litvak, Metro's regional community-relations manager.
* Another plan also would pick up from the Purple Line and travel under Wilshire Boulevard. But then it would head north on Fairfax Avenue and west Beverly Drive to serve the Grove, Beverly Center and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. After leaving the hospital, it would return to Wilshire Boulevard, hit Century City and head to the coast.
* Two more subway plans include variations of the Wilshire Boulevard routes but also would involve a second train coming from the Red Line at Hollywood Boulevard and Highland Avenue and zipping below Santa Monica Boulevard to serve West Hollywood. The lines would converge on Wilshire Boulevard and head to the sea.
Although the largest portion of Metro's $3 billion budget - about $1.8 billion - comes from a one-cent sales tax, that money cannot be contributed toward tunneling for any subway because of a 1998 ban that was passed by 70 percent of voters. Even if that prohibition were repealed, money from the sales tax is already committed to other projects on Metro's long-range transit plans through 2030, Litvak said.
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #2 on May 6, 2008, 8:07am »
I was glad to see that two of the four maps include a Santa Monica Blvd. option, one that be eventually extended south to Expo or even potentially LAX and east to Silver Lake and downtown.
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 319 Location: UCLA
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #3 on May 6, 2008, 9:07am »
I don't think I can vote on this poll. I want an all-Wilshire alignment except for Century City, but I also recognize that La Cienega would be a better route for a Red Line extension from Hollywood than a Santa Monica alignment.
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #4 on May 6, 2008, 9:24am »
It sound like there is an option in two of the maps which would make both Santa Monica Blvd. and La Cienega Blvd. supporters happy. Two of the maps apparently have a Santa Monica Blvd. alignment which extends down La Cienega, which could eventually be extended down to Expo or theoretically all the way down to LAX.
Perhaps the poll needs to be redesigned with the four proposals on offer.
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 688 Location: Expo Park/Coliseum adjacent
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #5 on May 6, 2008, 10:44am »
Dan, that would defeat the whole purpose of this poll.
The poll was designed to put you in the seat of the people planning and funding this project, they would have to make a choice based on the information and funding they have in front of them and make those refined decisions. Making two choices assumes money is no object, and as transit advocates of course we'd want both corridors to work.
What would get an understanding to study and fund both corridors would be that the results come out even and equal. And at this point in time with the poll it looks that way, without even having a fourth choice.
« Last Edit: May 6, 2008, 10:47am by JerardWright »
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #6 on May 6, 2008, 10:57am »
Thanks for the explanation, Jerard.
With the MTA choosing not to go for a one-seat option from North Hollywood and Century City, I really hope there was enough support expressed for a Sepulveda LRT to/from LAX to/from the Valley to make it into the LRTP. Those countless people snaking through the passes and canyons each way every day desperately want and need a public transit alternative, and the misdesigned Rapid 761 providing local bus service in the back end of Brentwood and Westwood, pooping out at Wilshire/Westwood ain't it.
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #7 on May 6, 2008, 11:15am »
heh. without even reading the article, I voted for the first option (Wilshire Boulevard- Century City). I was a tad surprised to find that I was the only one voting for that option ^_^;;;
why did I vote that way? well, I almost voted for the Grove diversion, but I had my doubts. frankly, in a "money is no object" universe, I probably would have prefered the "Wilshire/ Santa Monica" option. however, with any project involving the MTA, money is ALWAYS an object.
of course, I easily recognize the value of the Wilshire corridor. and I think that the West Hollywood route needs to be considered. but at the same time, the MTA is also looking at the Regional Connector and the Crenshaw line and FoGL is still trying to convince the MTA to extend the Green Line. also, there's the possibility of a Valley to Westside line
with so many projects on the table, can we afford to spend too much on any one area...?
« Last Edit: May 6, 2008, 11:16am by James Fujita »
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #8 on May 6, 2008, 11:29am »
I think that the poll, tough though it is to answer, is a good one. I answered the double Wilshire/Santa Monica option, although I'd rather go with the Grove diversion and stick to Wilshire ONLY for now, and then deal with Santa Monica some time in the future.
The need to drive this as far west as possible, with a few diversions to key destinations, is probably the #1 priority here. Still, I'd be pretty horrified if we didn't recognize the need to keep the Santa Monica Blvd. option open just like we'll need to make sure that the future Crenshaw LRT project connects to the Purple Line as well.
Our #1 priorities for each project shouldn't prevent the #2 and #3 priorities from being pursued in the next decade, especially with the high-quality projects we're pursuing right now.
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #9 on May 6, 2008, 11:36am »
Quote:
with so many projects on the table, can we afford to spend too much on any one area...?
Well how much money have we already spent south of Wilshire on the Blue Line, Green Line, soon to be Expo Line and Crenshaw Lines, and then two Gold Line extensions east of Downtown?
Aren't the Westside and the Valley are playing catch up at this point? Granted, that's where the NIMBYs have had their greatest strength historically and thrown up the most obstacles.
Quote:
also, there's the possibility of a Valley to Westside line
I'd love that, but it wasn't in the LRTP and right now the MTA will not even provide an adequate Rapid Bus from the Valley to the Westside that doesn't require multiple transfers. It seems they go out of their way not to provide quality transit between the Valley and the Westside -- then an inadequate and misdesigned 761 "proves" there isn't demand for one. If I didn't know better, I'd say it is willful ignorance. Of course, then there are the turf disputes between the MTA and the Big Blue Bus which complicate this further, so don't get me started.
« Last Edit: May 6, 2008, 11:38am by Dan Wentzel »
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 688 Location: Expo Park/Coliseum adjacent
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #10 on May 6, 2008, 12:12pm »
Well that's whole point of the public comment portion of the LRTP is so that is raised into the deeper conscience of the general public. Right now it's in Tier 2, you think it should be higher tell them with sound logic and understanding to move it UP to Tier 1 status as a number of groups have already done.
On the bus level, I've been working with the San Fernando Sector Governance Council member as chair of the Westside/Central Sector for the past year and a half to find opportunities to work a higher quality and faster service on the 405 corridor which could then link deeper into the westside to have a connection at the Venice/Robertson Expo Line. Which when that service is overloaded and over capacity would then get Metro to make a case for a rail service. But all of that takes time. I'd love to have it operating this year, but the key is getting that conversation started and fine tuning it to the point that it works and its very successful from day one.
« Last Edit: May 6, 2008, 12:13pm by JerardWright »
On the bus level, I've been working with the San Fernando Sector Governance Council member as chair of the Westside/Central Sector for the past year and a half to find opportunities to work a higher quality and faster service on the 405 corridor which could then link deeper into the westside to have a connection at the Venice/Robertson Expo Line. Which when that service is overloaded and over capacity would then get Metro to make a case for a rail service. But all of that takes time. I'd love to have it operating this year, but the key is getting that conversation started and fine tuning it to the point that it works and its very successful from day one.
Well, this probably isn't the thread to discuss the particulars of that, but I wish you all the luck in the world with that very necessary improvement.
I did start a thread on bus travel between the Westside and Valley to discuss the matter, for it is a topic dear to many transit riding hearts in the Valley and the Westside.
I did start a thread on bus travel between the Westside and Valley to discuss the matter, for it is a topic dear to many transit riding hearts in the Valley and the Westside.
I-405 Corridor Busway between Metro Orange Line Sepulveda Station and Metro Green Line Aviation Station was a Tier 2 project in the Draft LRTP.
Transit projects were divided into Recommended (i.e. funded - Expo phase 2, Orange Line to Chatsworth, and Crenshaw in the 2020s, that's about all) and Strategic (i.e. unfunded) Tier 1 (closer to ready to build) and Tier 2.
I and others specifically pushed for raising the I-405 busway to Tier 1, recognizing its importance and place in the original 1980 Prop. A map (as a rail corridor).
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #13 on May 6, 2008, 9:41pm »
Until Metro's presentation is posted, here are photos of the Westside Extension boards from tonight's meeting. Remaining alternatives -- with the best performance -- are two subway options along the Wilshire corridor, these two with Hollywood branches added, and the obligatory No Project, TSM, and BRT. These are only general route and station locations.
Alt. 1. This is the basic Wilshire route, with different details from Century City to Westwood. Orange rectangles highlight changes from previous versions.
Alt. 14. This turns north to serve Farmers Market and Cedars-Sinai. Unlike its previous version, it returns to Wilshire to a station at Robertson (as close to La Cienega as possible), apparently at the request of Beverly Hills.
Alt. 11. Hollywood is envisioned as trains running between Santa Monica and Hollywood, with transfer to Red Line at Hollywood/Highland.
Alt. 16. Hollywood branch added to the Farmers Market alternative.
Other notes:
The Santa Monica Blvd.-only options were dropped for lower ridership and cost-effectiveness. For the new stations served:
Wilshire only -- 71K new boardings (2030), 53K daily travel hours saved, $5.5B capital cost, $32/hour saved*
Santa Monica only -- 55K new boardings, 41K daily travel hours saved
Wilshire + Hollywood -- 82K new boardings, 62K daily travel hours saved, $8B capital cost, $37/hour saved*
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #15 on May 6, 2008, 9:52pm »
Then there were these two great simulations of a monorail above Wilshire at Fairfax, using a Las Vegas station to show how much space it would take and how it would block the sky. Metro doesn't recommend further study of any aerial alternatives in this corridor, either HRT, LRT, or monorail.
(These are photos off their screen presentation; I'll upgrade them when available. Done.)
...Alt. 14. This turns north to serve Farmers Market and Cedars-Sinai. Unlike its previous version, it returns to Wilshire to a station at Robertson (as close to La Cienega as possible), apparently at the request of Beverly Hills.
I love Alternative #14, except for those extra unneccessary stations in Beverly Hills (Wilshire/Robertson) and Hancock Park (Wilshire/Crenshaw) eliminating those stops would create a much smoother and a faster just as effective alignment as a straight Wilshire Corridor and gain more riders.
I went to the LACMA meeting Monday and came in late because of a slow Rapid bus driver, I didn't hear what the ridership numbers were for the Wilshire- Cedars-Grove diversion
I didn't hear what the ridership numbers were for the Wilshire- Cedars-Grove diversion
I only heard general numbers for the Wilshire corridor, not separated for the two alternatives. Jody said the presentation will be up soon on Metro's website, and sooner on her MySpace page.
I only heard general numbers for the Wilshire corridor, not separated for the two alternatives. Jody said the presentation will be up soon on Metro's website, and sooner on her MySpace page.
Alt. 16. Hollywood branch added to the Farmers Market alternative.
I'm leaning toward this one. I'd like to see the "Beverly Center" station designed as a full wye junction, to allow all three possible routings. [These would be: (1) the Wilshire route (Santa Monica-Downtown), (2) the Santa Monica-Hollywood route, and (3) the Wilshire Shuttle route (MidWilshire-Hollywood).]
I also would skip the optional stations at Wilshire/Robertson and Wilshire/Crenshaw. My problem with them is that they are in locations that virtually guarantee they would never have the ridership to justify the additional monetary cost and travel time.
« Last Edit: May 7, 2008, 10:16am by metrocenter »
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 386 Location: Leimert Park, CA
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #20 on May 7, 2008, 10:18am »
Those ridership numbers are very disappointing, and should, if played right, further the discussion of turning the Purple Line north towards the SFV. Then again, Metro really sucks at modeling, but I've never heard the criticism be that they under-calculate new trips.
Nonetheless, back to the SFV-route, ideally, the Purple Line would turn north after Wilshire/Westwood, have a stop at UCLA (Strathmore/Westwood), and then go all the way to the SFV Busway at Van Nuys station (no I will not dignify the busway by referencing it by a color).
Build the WYE at Wilshire/Westwood to allow future western route to Santa Monica (Purple) and future southern route to LAX and the South Bay (405/Van Nuys line), but given these numbers and a reasonably decent understanding of the regional traffic, I have to think it's much wiser to head north to the SFV than west to Santa Monica. It's likely cheaper than any of the alternatives, and serves to provide the SFV to Century City connection even quicker.
The 9 billion (using Metro's numbers of 6.5 billion in combination of the 2.5 bil that's earmarked for Expo Phase 2 and Crenshaw) is much better spent: -Grade separated Expo to speed up the line to make it a true Downtown LA-Santa Monica route, and allow future branches -Turning the Purple north to the SFV after Wilshire/Westwood to Van Nuys SFV Busway station -Expo Phase 2 with a WYE at Sepulveda and branch line to Wilshire/Westwood (built to heavy rail specs to allow for future 405/Van Nuys line) -Crenshaw branch of Expo to LAX -Crenshaw branch to Wilshire/La Brea
We'd probably double the ridership anticipated from the as currently proposed Crenshaw, Expo Phase 2, and the Subway to the Sea.
And if, by some miracle, we reprogram that waste of money for the 405 HOV lane, we can have the DTC too. Then we'd be cooking with grease. As I think about it more, the DTC would be a requisite with branches of Expo. But what the heck by creating projects that attract more riders, we'd get better matches.
Alas, there's no discussion of regional needs, no real ambitious strategic goals or even realistic strategic goals, other than "build something." But I digress.
Oh and incidentally, Alt. 14 is exactly as I've been suggesting for a Wilshire route (re: stations) for some time now.
« Last Edit: May 7, 2008, 10:37am by damiengoodmon »
"If that passion were directed at fighting for grade separation instead of fighting the people who want grade separation, it might actually get us closer to the type of rail transit system this region needs and deserves."
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #21 on May 7, 2008, 10:23am »
that monorail is the ugliest thing I've ever seen
IF there was enough money in the budget for two rail lines to be built, I would vote for Alternative 11. The Beverly Center would still get its station, but passengers headed from Santa Monica to downtown or from Century City to downtown wouldn't have the diversion.
under any circumstance, Wilshire ought to be "phase 1," and the West Hollywood line ought to be second
(or maybe even third behind a Crenshaw line to Wilshire extension? West Hollywood probably would be the more important of the two, but we really ought to keep our options open. EDIT: see also Damien's post )
« Last Edit: May 7, 2008, 10:25am by James Fujita »
Joined: Mar 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 386 Location: Leimert Park, CA
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #22 on May 7, 2008, 10:32am »
Oh and I'd love to see Brian Brooks face once when monorail slide runs. Then again, I don't think it's Brian that's pushing the Wilshire monorail. He's all flood channels...I think.
Nonetheless, there are ways of fitting the columns down Wilshire (cut some of the sidewalk, narrow some of the lanes) but the stations are always the worst from an aesthetic standpoint.
« Last Edit: May 7, 2008, 10:38am by damiengoodmon »
"If that passion were directed at fighting for grade separation instead of fighting the people who want grade separation, it might actually get us closer to the type of rail transit system this region needs and deserves."
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #23 on May 7, 2008, 11:43am »
I believe it's Robert Rosebrock who is pushing the Wilshire Monorail.
I, too, believe that the Wilshire Subway should our first/foremost priority, but while I do see merit to getting it west of the 405 freeway, I don't believe it needs to go west of Bundy. Perhaps when the Wilshire subway makes it to Century City or UCLA, we can talk about adding the Crenshaw/Red Line connections to the main subway arterial on Wilshire.
I believe that the Sepulveda/405 rail project between UCLA and the Valley (which is needed, as Damien describes, before a UCLA/LAX project but that's also a phase 1/phase 2 kinda thing) is far more important than getting the Wilshire subway all the way to the beach.
Joined: Oct 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 2,110 Location: Cal Heights, Long Beach, CA
Re: Westside Extension Meetings « Reply #24 on May 7, 2008, 12:27pm »
I agree that there is little reason to bring the subway all the way to the beach. Wilshire/Federal or Wilshire/Bundy should be enough. (I say this as someone who works right where Wilshire dead-ends at the ocean.)
Ultimately, it will be very important to create a line that goes from LAX to the Valley and connects Expo and UCLA. But before that happens, the subway must get built, since it is the backbone of the system.
![[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]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
![[locked poll]](http://images.proboards.com/poll_icon_closed.gif "[locked poll]"){kind=icon}
Poll
Author
![[avatar]](http://i32.tinypic.com/fns30h.jpg "[avatar]")
Logged
![[avatar]](http://images.proboards.com/avatars/dog.gif "[avatar]")
![[aim]](http://images.proboards.com/aim.gif "[aim]")
![[avatar]](http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/6356/trolleyt.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://www.thetransitcoalition.us/nationaltc/Pics/KennethAlpern.gif "[avatar]")
![[image]](http://friends4expo.org/images/westside-ext-alt1-700.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://friends4expo.org/images/westside-ext-alt14-700.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://friends4expo.org/images/westside-ext-alt11-700.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://friends4expo.org/images/westside-ext-alt16-700.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://friends4expo.org/images/monorail-streetscape-above-.jpg "[image]")
![[image]](http://friends4expo.org/images/monorail-streetscape-below-.jpg "[image]")
![[avatar]](http://www.canterbury.gov.uk/images/maps/by_train2.gif "[avatar]")