|
Post by bluelineshawn on Apr 23, 2009 15:45:22 GMT -8
Everything that I've seen from Metro shows a line down Vermont being heavy rail, not light rail. With 1-2 heavy rail lines due to start construction in a few years there is no way that Vermont will also start anytime soon.
And I for one take Metro's ridership projections with a grain of salt. Crenshaw will get much higher ridership than projected if it's built right and connects where it should. The blue line gets 80k riders a day now. If it weren't already there and Metro did a model for projected ridership what do you think they would predict? 25k? 35k? 50k? Whatever it is, I'm sure that it wouldn't be 80k. And I still think that it will go higher. When they go to 5 min rush hour headways all the way to Long Beach and after Expo and the Gold line ext open we might see closer to 90k, if not 100k.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Apr 23, 2009 20:38:11 GMT -8
Everything that I've seen from Metro shows a line down Vermont being heavy rail, not light rail. With 1-2 heavy rail lines due to start construction in a few years there is no way that Vermont will also start anytime soon. And I for one take Metro's ridership projections with a grain of salt. Crenshaw will get much higher ridership than projected if it's built right and connects where it should. The blue line gets 80k riders a day now. If it weren't already there and Metro did a model for projected ridership what do you think they would predict? 25k? 35k? 50k? Whatever it is, I'm sure that it wouldn't be 80k. And I still think that it will go higher. When they go to 5 min rush hour headways all the way to Long Beach and after Expo and the Gold line ext open we might see closer to 90k, if not 100k. Well to bring it to Wilshire and grade separate it between Harbor Sub and Expo, the project will cost close to a staggering $4 billion. I agree the MTA generally understates projected ridership, but the same model gets applied across the board so it should be comparable. This route doesn't really serve any major job centers other than LAX if the People Mover gets built. Also, the corridor isn't as dense as others nearby as neighborhoods around Crenshaw are generally single family suburban type in nature. Also, Crenshaw doesn't have the bus ridership anywhere close to the areas to the East. There is no engineering reason we can't build heavy rail at the same rate we build light-rail. It may even sae money. I just don't see the ridership all that high, but I hope I am wrong as we are making an unbelievably large long-term bet on this line.
|
|
|
Post by wad on Apr 28, 2009 4:13:32 GMT -8
Measure R has locked in a mandated project for Crenshaw. Metro must deliver a line that has poorer ridership prospects than a Vermont subway.
The one way to salvage the Crenshaw line is to build what I call "the trifecta."
The Crenshaw line would make sense as heavy rail, but it must be a southern branch of the subway. This is one part of the trifecta.
The other two parts are the Purple Line to Westwood and then Santa Monica, and the Pink Line.
Other advantages I see with the trifecta:
Coalition-building. The Westside and South L.A. projects are going to be tied together, making for a broader base of support for the project to be completed.
Solving the Vermont Split problem. Metro is planning for the Pink Line to be a junction station at Hollywood/Highland, because it does not want 2 Vermont trains for every Wilshire train. Red ... Purple ... Pink ... Red and so forth. This would allow a continuous Pink Line from downtown without a transfer. (The engineering challenge of adding a junction at Hollywood and Highland can be solved by a lengthy period of inconvenience where trains during off-peak hours would run single-track service between Hollywood/Vine and North Hollywood.) With the trifecta, you'd have Red ... Purple ... Pink ... Crenshaw Line Color.
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Apr 28, 2009 9:00:41 GMT -8
Or you could split Hollywood/Highland the other way, resulting in three lines, no more than two sharing any section of track:
* Red Line as now, Union Station to North Hollywood;
* Purple Line as planned, Union Station to Wilshire/Bundy or wherever it ends (could even curve south to LAX);
* Pink Line as a long north-south corridor from North Hollywood - Hollywood/Highland - Santa Monica/La Cienega - Wilshire/La Cienega - (transfer at Wilshire/Fairfax) - Wilshire/La Brea - Crenshaw/Expo - Prairie/Century - LAX.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Apr 28, 2009 9:25:27 GMT -8
There are a lot of good things to your proposals, now that it appears that the Crenshaw Line will be so grade separated. It allows for a first rate north-south line to serve the Valley, Westside and Mid-City regions, also allows for a Green Line LRT to LAX Parking Lot C, and full usage of the Harbor Subdivision ROW for its own line.
|
|