|
Post by matthewb on May 11, 2012 4:49:27 GMT -8
Regarding the comment above: "People should ride a bike, walk, or take a bus to a Metro station." People should, and eventually, more of them will, but don't expect the majority of Southern Californians to leave their cars at home (or sell them) any time soon. The habit of the personal car being the "default setting" for local transportation will take a while to break. It's partially habit, but I think there are two main ingredients that will really change the culture in favor of transit ridership: - Let the network grow until it covers the majority of destinations people care about. If I can get to 90% of where I want to go in a reasonable time with transit, if it's cheaper and more efficient, I won't need a car and will think first of taking transit instead of driving.
- Upzone areas around transit stations. This will allow more people to live within walking and biking distance of transit lines, and will put more destinations within walking reach of transit. This is the "wag the dog" solution to transit effectiveness. Rather than build more lines to accommodate people's current transportation needs, let people organize their lives to more effectively use the transit lines that are already there.
Without this second element, LA is committing itself to having a less effective transportation network for a given amount of expenditure. Think of this the next time anyone talks about "over developing" the westside (fill in your favorite part of the city here).
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on May 11, 2012 7:57:56 GMT -8
The most important part of a transit project is changing the density around stations. Look at how well built South Pasadena and Del Mar became due to the Gold Line. The same can be said for Koreatown, Hollywood, and downtown Long Beach, with its respective rail lines. That is sustainable ridership. We need more upzoning to get people to live and work walking/biking distance away from stations. Relying on park-n-rides are "no destination" stations; which could mean no/little boardings for hours. Look at how much activity there is at Hollywood/Highland, Pico, Pershing Square, Memorial Park, Soto, USC/Expo Park, etc... those stations are busy with every train that arrives. Look at the zoning around each of those stations...do you notice the massive park and ride? Nope, because it doesn't exist.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on May 11, 2012 14:55:41 GMT -8
The most important part of a transit project is changing the density around stations. Look at how well built South Pasadena and Del Mar became due to the Gold Line. The same can be said for Koreatown, Hollywood, and downtown Long Beach, with its respective rail lines. That is sustainable ridership. We need more upzoning to get people to live and work walking/biking distance away from stations. Relying on park-n-rides are "no destination" stations; which could mean no/little boardings for hours. Look at how much activity there is at Hollywood/Highland, Pico, Pershing Square, Memorial Park, Soto, USC/Expo Park, etc... those stations are busy with every train that arrives. Look at the zoning around each of those stations...do you notice the massive park and ride? Nope, because it doesn't exist. I definately agree. People in the Westside Extension meetings were asking for parking at stations (mainly the Brentwood Community Council Transportation Chair). Well, she lived in the hills and didn't really care that Wilshire Blvd. doesn't really have any room for parking or that there is already a functioning city there that can support subway stations. However, that being said, I think Expo has it about right. The Culver City parking lot makes sense as a terminal station but it will be developed as Phase II gets under way. That leaves La Cienega as the main parking station.
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on May 11, 2012 16:59:25 GMT -8
What else is at LaCienega/Jefferson station? The best BBQ shack in LA is a block north at LaCienega/Fairfax! Trust me. I'm from Memphis and so are the owners. Also, about the only Target in LA that's walking distance to Metro Rail. AWE, i was going to try that place but didn't have time!
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 11, 2012 18:00:50 GMT -8
They have broken the glass enclosures and stolen all the fire extinguishers in the La Cienega parking structure. Why don't these low-lives get jobs instead of committing these crimes?
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on May 11, 2012 20:12:07 GMT -8
They have broken the glass enclosures and stolen all the fire extinguishers in the La Cienega parking structure. Why don't these low-lives get jobs instead of committing these crimes? Transit attracts low-lives </nimby>
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on May 12, 2012 5:47:51 GMT -8
This is the big benefit of the Expo Line...all those morning charity run/walks! I was scared they were going to close down the tracks because a lot of those charity run/walks crossed over Exposition/Vermont. Let's see how it works! RT @@metrolosangeles : Sat 6am-2pm: Expo Line to run extra service for Revlon Run/Walk @eifrevlonrw_LA. Many Bus Advisories this Weekend: bit.ly/servadv ^ST
|
|
|
Post by spokker on May 12, 2012 7:47:35 GMT -8
They have broken the glass enclosures and stolen all the fire extinguishers in the La Cienega parking structure. Why don't these low-lives get jobs instead of committing these crimes? Transit attracts low-lives </nimby> What's the point of mentioning NIMBYs here? If the facilities are already being trashed than maybe it does. I don't believe that but your snarky remark is just as ridiculous as it attempts to deflect the focus from those responsible to some NIMBY boogeyman.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 12, 2012 16:02:29 GMT -8
Anyone ride today that can share what ridership and train frequencies were like? Expo sure does have a lot of special events compared to the other rail lines and certainly compared to the blue line. Once it's open to Santa Monica, 12 minute headways on the weekend are going to be very insufficient. The blue line could really use 10 minute headways mid-day Saturday and Expo will need at least that and maybe every 5 minutes.
I rode at rush hour for the first time on Friday and it was still considerably less busy than midday Saturday, which is so far Expo's "rush hour". We had maybe 30-40 people max in our car headed west with almost half headed to USC graduation ceremonies. It was much lighter heading east until we got to Jefferson and then over 50 USC graduates/families boarded.
|
|
|
Post by simonla on May 12, 2012 17:08:47 GMT -8
I rode this morning from La Cienega to DTLA. At about 10 a.m., the parking lot was quite full, though the train was quite light. Maybe 20 people if that (we passed by the breast cancer walk--and some walkers stared at the train with pleasant bewilderment). Riding back to USC around 2, the train was fuller. Not crowded, but a good amount for weekend service. Riding back to La Cienega at 4, the amount of passengers was somewhere between the morning and 2 p.m.
A few observations: Getting through Downtown on both trips was relatively painless--the lights seemed much better synched than earlier weeks--though we could have been lucky both times.
Signage at 7th St./Metro is not good. When a train pulls up, the sign still reads "Los Angeles," so you have no idea if it's heading to Long Beach or La Cienega, and whether you need to run to the other platform (can't the sign be changed as soon as it leaves Pico?). The sign first changed to Long Beach, before workers screamed, "Expo Line!" People were confused, but workers did repeatedly tell people the train was going to La Cienega, even sticking their heads in cars and telling riders.
There's also a big sign at 7th pointing to "Blue Line/Expo Line" on one of the platforms--the circles are the exact same color. That sign needs to be changed; it's confusing.
The Jefferson/USC station only has one entrance--we entered from the wrong side and then to enter the station we had to walk in the street because the sidewalk was closed (for construction? I don't know why). RIDICULOUS.
The train at Jefferson/USC also announced the train was going to Culver City (as opposed to La Cienega). Uh, no.
Finally, I've heard people say there's only one exit to the La Cienega garage--no, there's a clearly marked exit directing people to La Cienega (along with the Jefferson exit). Pulling out onto La Cienega isn't that difficult for anyone who's used to being a driver in LA (aggressive). The complication though is that while you're waiting for a moment to pull out on La Cienega, you might be blocking the sidewalk--though there's not that many pedestrians on La Cienega, sadly, so it's not that big a problem yet.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 12, 2012 17:28:26 GMT -8
Thanks for the update simonla!
All of the trains automatically announce both Culver City and Farmdale and it's hit and miss as to whether those are corrected by the train operator. Also, they seem to have corrected the continually incorrect station announcements or maybe I was just lucky.
Regarding Jefferson/USC, how did you end up on the wrong side of the station? Unless I'm mistaken there's no crosswalk to get there and there are signs pointing to cross at Jefferson.
I agree about the lights being better coordinated. My trips on Friday - at rush hour no less - were slow, but not painfully slow. I also heard that they will continue to get better and that the train prioritization hasn't been working as expected.
I also agree about identifying the trains better as they come in. They need to get monitors in the station so that people will know. But then again Metro doesn't even seem to know. Yesterday a train came in and was signed for Long Beach and the train operator kept announcing Long Beach. But the PA in the station kept announcing Willow. I have a feeling that the train operator better knows where he's going, but it's not unheard of for a blue line train to depart 7th/metro as a Long Beach train and then change to Willow en route.
And in that vein, I still see people wanting the blue line boarding Expo trains, especially at Pico. It's signed Expo, the operator announces Expo several times and people still board the wrong train. Several have complained that the Expo train was "on the blue line track". I've tried to explain that they share the same tracks to no avail. lol
|
|
|
Post by simonla on May 12, 2012 17:45:19 GMT -8
Re: Jefferson/USC: We walked up 33rd, since we were passing by that big mixed-use project which has tons of restaurants. You can see the station from 33rd, so many people probably walk up that street and then see that the entrance is a block south. Not a big deal, except that the sidewalk was closed on that block of Flower--and there's only one side of the street with a sidewalk! (The other side is the train). Point being, if the sidewalk is open, it's not a big deal. I'll try to call LADOT or whoever the hell you call.
Regarding, the wrong announcements for CC and Farmdale--thankfully this kink will work itself out (hopefully in a month!) without any pestering.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 12, 2012 19:30:15 GMT -8
Oh I see! I misunderstood and thought that you were on the east side of Flower. I pretty much did the exact same thing after eating at the Subway in that same building last weekend, but the sidewalk was open when we realized our mistake.
|
|
|
Post by carter on May 12, 2012 20:28:24 GMT -8
I also rode the line yesterday into downtown at about 4 pm and found the signals to be much better timed. Hardly any stopping at all -- other than, of course, the station stops.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 13, 2012 2:04:10 GMT -8
I also rode the line yesterday into downtown at about 4 pm and found the signals to be much better timed. Hardly any stopping at all -- other than, of course, the station stops. You can't really infer much based on a single ride. It's sometimes almost all greens, sometimes only a few reds, but if you are unlucky, a lot of reds. I am hearing that it's worst in the morning. Someone who rides it every morning from 7th/Metro told me that it's consistently 5 minutes or so slower from there to USC in the mornings. Remember also what Rick said at the last board meeting: Trains have signal priority but it only works if there isn't another train from the other direction that recently passed the same signal. My experience between La Cienega and Vermont has usually been good. It's usually either just about the scheduled time (14 minutes) and at other times a few minutes faster and much less frequently a few minutes longer. Breakdowns are also happening. There was a major one due to a bad lightning arrester reported here and in LA Times. For some reason, trains also tend to malfunction at La Cienega sometimes, which delays things. Cab-signal problems are also common with the Nippon Sharyos. The other day we had some great difficulty with the cab-signal problem causing ATP to keep braking the train to a halt. It happened somewhere toward the west end of the line.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 13, 2012 8:32:45 GMT -8
It's not just a single ride, my ride one post earlier was faster as well and the blue line trips have also been a little faster. It seems like they are making at least some headway.
And Simon I saw why the sidewalk is blocked. There's a large piece of siding propped next to a building. Not sure if they coordinated with LAbor the property owner did that on their own. Guessing the latter.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on May 13, 2012 8:49:53 GMT -8
I rode the line on Friday from La Cienega to downtown. Total trip time was 31 minutes.
It took us a long time to get to Expo/La Brea for some reason (at least two stops I think). Still, I'm confident they will be able to speed the line up soon.
I'll post some pictures of my first trip on opening day soon.
|
|
|
Post by carter on May 13, 2012 9:24:28 GMT -8
Breakdowns are also happening. There was a major one due to a bad lightning arrester reported here and in LA Times. For some reason, trains also tend to malfunction at La Cienega sometimes, which delays things. More anecdotes: This has happened to me too about a week ago. We sat in the train at La Cienega for almost 10 minutes after the scheduled departure time while the operator tried to troubleshoot something with an engineer. I believe I overheard something about the emergency break not disengaging on one of the second or third cars. I've also experienced this. I believe it was somewhere between Crenshaw and La Cienega.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 14, 2012 11:12:33 GMT -8
It turns out, if you catch all greens, travel time from La Cienega to Vermont is 11 minutes. This is exactly the same as what we had on Wikipedia assuming signal priority. So, if you could get signal priority for the trains, the travel time from Culver City to 7th/Metro would decrease from 29 minutes to 21 minutes.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 14, 2012 11:13:08 GMT -8
Today I saw two BMWs parking in the La Cienega Parking structure. After one of them parked, the other one picked up the driver from it and they drove together in one of them off the parking structure. What can be done to prevent such illegal parking in these Metro park-and-ride facilities?
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on May 14, 2012 11:52:14 GMT -8
Today I saw two BMWs parking in the La Cienega Parking structure. After one of them parked, the other one picked up the driver from it and they drove together in one of them off the parking structure. What can be done to prevent such illegal parking in these Metro park-and-ride facilities? What are the rules? What if you parked there and used a bus instead? Is that allowed, or is it only for Expo travel - or anyone who needs to park? What if you take Expo and then come back and go somewhere else? Considering these are Metro facilities, can LA parking control work this structure? If so, it would just need some aggressive enforcement every once in a while to get compliance. Also, because it's public, they can run the plates of every parked car and boot offenders after X number of violations. Culver City will also be especially abused. That area is extremely short of parking and I'm sure people will regularly attempt to park there for free. But - maybe that's OK? Anyone?
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on May 14, 2012 12:03:17 GMT -8
Today I saw two BMWs parking in the La Cienega Parking structure. After one of them parked, the other one picked up the driver from it and they drove together in one of them off the parking structure. What can be done to prevent such illegal parking in these Metro park-and-ride facilities? What are the rules? What if you parked there and used a bus instead? Is that allowed, or is it only for Expo travel - or anyone who needs to park? What if you take Expo and then come back and go somewhere else? Considering these are Metro facilities, can LA parking control work this structure? If so, it would just need some aggressive enforcement every once in a while to get compliance. Also, because it's public, they can run the plates of every parked car and boot offenders after X number of violations. Culver City will also be especially abused. That area is extremely short of parking and I'm sure people will regularly attempt to park there for free. But - maybe that's OK? Anyone? Metrolink has this problem a lot. The resolution? No parking between 2 am to 5 am. Basically, it prevents people from using the parking structure just as you mentioned. Leaving one car there overnight. Another solution, start charging for using the Metro lot. It's absolutely ridiculous that Metro is giving away free parking. People should pay to park and ride.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 14, 2012 12:21:40 GMT -8
Metrolink has this problem a lot. The resolution? No parking between 2 am to 5 am. This only solves the overnight-parking problem. Charging a buck or two would only discourage park-and-ride and convert the facility from park-and-ride into a cheap general public-parking facility. I think having occasional monitoring would be good. Boot or tow anyone who parks and crosses the street. Or if you suspect anything illegal, approach and talk to them. All businesses monitor their parking lots and so should Metro.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on May 14, 2012 12:40:55 GMT -8
I think having occasional monitoring would be good. Boot or tow anyone who parks and crosses the street. Or if you suspect anything illegal, approach and talk to them. All businesses monitor their parking lots and so should Metro. Not true. Union Station charges $6/day and they still get plenty of people who park in their garage. Metrolink charges and the lots are not empty. Hollywood/Highland, Lake station, etc..... That's a misconception. Why should we offer free parking? You're just incentivizing people to drive and not pay for maintenance of the garage. We have to pay to use the bus to the station.
|
|
|
Post by simonla on May 14, 2012 12:58:08 GMT -8
At least they were carpooling, I guess. But, yes, I get the larger point.
|
|
|
Post by carter on May 14, 2012 13:50:03 GMT -8
Culver City will also be especially abused. That area is extremely short of parking and I'm sure people will regularly attempt to park there for free. But - maybe that's OK? Anyone? I would hardly call Culver City "extremely short" of parking. There are three public parking structures in downtown that offer two hours free parking. www.downtownculvercity.com/parking.html
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 14, 2012 15:54:20 GMT -8
I think having occasional monitoring would be good. Boot or tow anyone who parks and crosses the street. Or if you suspect anything illegal, approach and talk to them. All businesses monitor their parking lots and so should Metro. Not true. Union Station charges $6/day and they still get plenty of people who park in their garage. Metrolink charges and the lots are not empty. Hollywood/Highland, Lake station, etc..... That's a misconception. Why should we offer free parking? You're just incentivizing people to drive and not pay for maintenance of the garage. We have to pay to use the bus to the station. You are comparing apples to oranges. Union Station is a gateway for intercity travel. Hollywood/Highland is an entertainment complex. Metrolink is different than Metro Rail in many ways (price, level of service, etc.). Most people who connect with a bus have a pass and don't pay extra. Also, driving is not free -- you have to pay for gas. The important thing is to provide people with various alternatives. For some people buses work better and for others park-and-ride. Others like to ride their bikes. More alternatives you provide, more useful the system will be. Also, some people are likely to convert from park-and-ride to buses if they get used to transit and if they find it suitable.
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on May 14, 2012 16:58:19 GMT -8
^^ reverse commuting to Irvine I did all of the above: "overnight" my car at the free car park, ride a bike from the train, and use my free bus connections on OCTA and the Irvine Shuttle.
The urban environment in LA is a different, far more hospitable animal for bus connections so parking, I feel, should be more conservative. Here's an idea: TAP to Park. Free parking only with a validated TAP within the past hour. If the car park is on the Westside: make everyone pay. Problem solved lol
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 14, 2012 17:55:30 GMT -8
Boot or tow anyone who parks and crosses the street. Can't do that because people could have a legitimate reason for crossing the street before boarding. Maybe they want a cup of coffee. They could maybe try and make some kind of free access that required using a TAP card, but I can't figure out a good way.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on May 14, 2012 17:59:20 GMT -8
Metrolink has this problem a lot. The resolution? No parking between 2 am to 5 am. I didn't realize that. I once asked Metrolink about parking overnight in Orange County and was told that it was allowed. Obviously it would be allowed at Amtrak stations, but I was told that it was allowed at all of them. Anyway it wouldn't work for LA Metro because quite a few people work an overnight shift and some of them do park their cars in Metro lots.
|
|