|
Post by darrell on Jun 11, 2008 21:53:46 GMT -8
this is LOS ANGELES. We're not a 3rd tier US city like that of Phoenix, Sacramento, San Jose, Sacramento, Houston, etc.... Houston - 4th largest U.S. city, not exactly "3rd tier" (2000 Census) Phoenix - 6th largest U.S. city San Diego - 7th largest U.S. city Dallas - 8th largest U.S. city San Jose - 11th largest U.S. city San Francisco - 13th largest U.S. city Note also that we're talking about one corridor within a larger Los Angeles rail network. And San Francisco runs BART at full grade seperation, that's what our comparison to San Francisco should be, not Muni BART : Muni light rail = Purple Line extension : Expo Line There's need and justification for both, given limited transit funds: heavy rail for the highest-density corridors, light rail for others. LA's Red Line is the only new U.S. heavy rail system started in the last thirty years. I just did a recent east coast swing of DC, Philly, New York, and Boston. ... There was 100% grade seperation everywhere. You sure about "100% grade separation everywhere"? Green Line photo at Boston University. Also see Jon Bell's Philadelphia Subway-Surface photos. I can imagine the same sitution happening on Vermont, Western, Crenshaw, Overland, Centinela, Sepulveda, Farmdale, etc... with the future Expo Line. Overland, Centinela, Sepulveda, and Farmdale are gated crossings with full preemption.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jun 11, 2008 23:06:05 GMT -8
Why do we only consider the US when talking about light rail? The main way to get people onto transit is not with speed (as that has not been enough for the Gold Line) but LOCATION! The Gold Line gets great speed but so what? Those stations along the route don't take you anywhere. There are only a few well-placed stations. The second is transit dependency. Look at the Blue Line. I haven't been on it for a while, and I don't remember it having any places that I really wanted to go (except for Long Beach), yet it gets great ridership despite the very long trip (and the slow section in Long Beach). This goes in line with parking availability, but that seems to be pretty consistent along the line (decreasing parking along our system would increase ridership across the board). Decreasing availability of cars will get people on transit (explaining how high gas prices have made transit numbers ride). Speed is not nearly the most important factor. Speed will not get people out of their cars (unless the speed advantage is enormous). Most transit riders will be commuters first and foremost. Being able to access their destinations is the most important factor. We need rapid transit that will get people to their jobs and back home with a reasonable walk, bike, or bus transfer. Then probably speed and after that cost, cleanliness, comfort, etc in order of personal preference. I think that's metro's approach. They'd love to have grade separated lines running all over the county, but that's not feasible to build nor operate. So they're trying to use light rail to access as many destinations as possible. I'm on board with that, but at $100 million per mile we need to make sure that we're spending our money wisely. We need to grade separate where possible to keep the speed up so that the lines are desirable and useful.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jun 11, 2008 23:15:02 GMT -8
But I'm not really seeing much of a difference if a train runs at 35 mph because it runs without grade separation and at 55 mph with grade separation. And this slow speed does have added benefits (the traffic calming that I mentioned before has great benefits that people just like to ignore). Running the train in the middle of a street will also force cars to slow down which will make the community safer for everyone.
I really wish that more people knew the benefits of traffic calming, and it would be something great for LA (it would bring added density and walkable neighborhoods, something that is really lacking in our city).
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Jun 11, 2008 23:21:11 GMT -8
The difference is not so much the difference in speed as much as it is the time spent waiting on road and pedestrian traffic at lights.
And I agree that there are lots of benefits to at grade operation. That's why Santa Monica wants the trains at grade. Great for Santa Monica, maybe not as great for commuters.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jun 11, 2008 23:24:52 GMT -8
The trip from Santa Monica is supposed to take 35 minutes (might be way off here, I'm getting this number just out of my head). That doesn't seem like a long time for me. Besides, the Expo Line should help to change the city dynamic. This isn't just about catering to commuters, it should also be about changing the way we plan this city (allowing for density in places that can accommodate it instead of just squeezing as many people as we can into low-density housing. If we do this, then speed will matter very little (despite what Damien says about speed being the most important thing for LA).
|
|
|
Post by wad on Jun 11, 2008 23:26:05 GMT -8
This shows how democracy can lead to self-destruction of a community. In Islamic countries democracy leads to Islamic fascism, like in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, etc. Here it is leading to "NIMBY fascism." Gokhan, we shouldn't casually toss about fascism as a synonym for aspects of a government we loathe. Would you be insulted if I said that the country that most resembles the fascism last seen in the between-war period of the 20th century is ... the U.S.? Fascism, as what has been practiced, has certain tendencies even though the structures diverged in Germany, Italy and Spain. The U.S. has not yet gone in the direction of Germany with a concentrated genocide campaign ... though unlike the Nazis, our campaign -- Manifest Destiny -- succeeded. Our modern-day politics resembles mostly the Italian variant of fascism, which Mussolini called "corporatism." We see the incestuous relationship of government and industry, where the means and ends of both are now identical. Plus we are also seeing the "politics as gang mentality" practiced effectively by right-wing mass media. Franco's Spain resembled an authoritarian-conservative police state, mainly seen through our Patriot Act. Moreover, fascism does require support across the broad range of social strata. It is perhaps the only form of popularly supported, home-grown tyranny. Remember that George W. Bush showed us his worst side in the four years since he was put in office under dubious circumstances ... and then was elected legitimately. Even if you support the notion that the GOP staged a massive vote-rigging effort in 2004, Bush still had enough votes for a popular majority to be legitimately elected. What is happening in the Islamic world is hard to pin down, but what it most certainly is not is fascism. Islam is now the world's largest faith, but is there a pan-religious unifying cause that rallies the faith of every member? No. The Arab Muslims have a much different agenda than the sub-Saharan African Muslims, who have different concerns than Pakistani Muslims. The largest Muslim country, though, is Indonesia, and the Asian Muslim countries have seen much more advanced social developments. Turkey and Asian Muslim countries stand to lose more by joining their Arab brethren in jihad, because despite their religion they are more tied to other international social relations. As for what we know as Islamofascism, the swarthy Arab hordes who want to fly planes into buildings and kill all Jews, this is a disturbing populist reaction that poses a threat to the U.S., but it is certainly not fascism. For one thing, the Arab states are as much threatened by the religious movements as we are. Second, the petro-economy that props up these states is also worried about how ... or even if, they have a place in a new regime. Third, if Islam is somehow a religious force that hinders social development, there is a modern counterpoint. It's one that was lost on the U.S., because our hands are bloody. In 1953 a man named Mossadegh aimed to do to Iran what Hugo Chavez is doing in Venezuela now. He was going to put Iran on a national economic plan that threatened the West. Mossadegh was no bin Laden. His aim was to turn Iran into the Scandanavia of the Middle East. The CIA orchestrated a coup and deposed him in favor of the shah. We all know how that turned out in 1979.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Jun 11, 2008 23:55:17 GMT -8
If we do this, then speed will matter very little (despite what Damien says about speed being the most important thing for LA). Tony, have you traveled the Blue Line segment from when it gets out of the Olympic tunnel to Alameda? Tell me what you think about speed when you get stopped at nearly a 1/4 of the lights for cars to make left turn lanes. Wouldn't you think at that point, it may be faster and more convenient for me to just drive to downtown Long Beach? As I've said previously, the journey between Grand station and Chick Hearn Station have taken anywhere between 2 - 7 minutes, b/c of mixed traffic. Speed is important in LA, as in any other city. Speed brings about convenience, and it goes hand in hand in transit development.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jun 11, 2008 23:59:04 GMT -8
So if it's all about end-to-end speed, then why does the Gold Line have such dismal ridership despite high average speed?
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Jun 12, 2008 4:39:19 GMT -8
The Gold Line has poor ridership for one reason only: a lack of a Downtown Connector. Union Station is its "downtown" terminus, but it's too far away from the Downtown destinations like City Hall, the Civic Center and Staples Center that most Gold Lines commuters ultimately access.
To a very large degree, we'll see the same problem when the Expo and Eastside light rails reach the completion of their first phases.
Fortunately, the Downtown Connector is very much on the radar screens of both the planners and the Metro Board, and when it's completed ridership will explode on many different fronts--both the light rail lines and the buses that feed into them.
It is also my prediction that a Blue Line upgrade that places the streetrunning portions of the Blue Line in Downtown Los Angeles underground will also gain greater support.
|
|
|
Post by damiengoodmon on Jun 12, 2008 5:41:05 GMT -8
Speed is especially important on this corridor because of the lack of major employment centers and destinations directly abutting the line between Vermont and Downtown Santa Monica.
Crenshaw Mall/Leimert Park, Downtown Culver City, Century City and Westwood all require shuttle service to and from the stations, which increases the trip time for commuters. That only emphasizes the importance of speed of the LRT.
A good example is the Green Line. David Meiger of Metro wrote a great paper on how really a system could get everything wrong from a design standpoint and still carry 40K riders per day, and it basically came down to the speed of the line - it's the fastest LRT in the country, due to reduced spacing and 64 mph running between stations.
And yes, Expo has long trip projections, similar to the Blue Line. Trips, which will be even longer when a DTC is built and it's connected to the Eastside extension. (An Eastside extension that was supposed to be heavy rail, and everyone in the Eastside knows is completely inadequate for the needs of that area, as has been stated in this very forum.)
Additionally: -Expo Line travel time end to end is more like 49-55, and that's not even calculating the likely signalized crossings at these Phase 2 streets (the LADOT compromise), Colorado Blvd running. -Traffic calming doesn't help if a rapid transit alternative isn't available. It just increases commuter times. -Expo Phase 2 is coming it at nearly $200 million a mile! But again, if built correctly the initial capital cost of grade separation far outweighs the adverse costs of at-grade alignment. -I'm really not the only person in the county who has suggested our polycentrism increases the importance of speed (i.e. grade separation). Google "travel demand modeling" "rapid transit modeling" "travel demand management" and you can come back with litany of reports. Expo Authority staff members have stated as much. They also admit that after this line hits 70K they're going to have headaches that make the problems on the Blue Line look like a cakewalk. -I liken Santa Monica's desire for at-grade alignment in their city to Downtown hijacking the DTC project to implement their Red Car Revival Project. Two completely different projects, with two completely different purposes attempted to be blended. But it will be very difficult to push the Colorado alignment when the property and business owners lawyer up. These individuals aren't like the Eastside extension business/property owners - they have loads of money.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jun 12, 2008 8:00:30 GMT -8
Gokhan, we shouldn't casually toss about fascism as a synonym for aspects of a government we loathe. wad, I agree with all your comments. I was only referring to extremists like bin Laden and the Al-Qaeda group and their flourishing in countries where there is no strict government control.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jun 12, 2008 8:23:07 GMT -8
(An Eastside extension that was supposed to be heavy rail, and everyone in the Eastside knows is completely inadequate for the needs of that area, as has been stated in this very forum.) Why haven't I ever heard any outcry from people living along the line? I know that may seem true, but do you have evidence, because from what I've read traffic calming will increase density and business and create a more livable, walkable neighborhood. Having transit there definitely helps, but it's not necessary (let's also remember how traffic calming increases fuel efficiency and decreases local pollution). The difference between putting Expo at grade in Santa Monica and putting the DTC at grade is the location. In Santa Monica, it is the end of the line, and it really isn't that important to have speed. It really won't affect that many people if it's slow at the end. And I think someone has done calculations here showing that grade separating in Santa Monica will only result in saving a minute off of the travel time. Doesn't seem worth it for such expense.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Jun 12, 2008 10:07:32 GMT -8
Funny, you mentioned the Green Line. Because most of that ridership is due to the reduced local service on the parallel corridors (Century, Imperial, 120th, El Segundo, Rosecrans) the best headway out of all the routes is 15 minutes, the Green Line's headway is 7-10 minutes all day and with the busy North-South corridors feeding the Green Line frequently it makes sense for those numbers to be good despite that because the connections are better and more frequent.
The Gold Line have none of these connections despite a similiar running speed and it's ridership is lower. Now this factor is changing since they've improved the frequency they are inching towards 25,000 riders a weekday and has stronger Saturday ridership than in years past because of this improved frequency. They can improve this number even more if they improved and increased the transit connections at key Gold Line stops in Pasadena. By doing that the ridership would increase by 5000 riders since the connections are important to any transit corridor.
This may explain why Wilshire and Vermont buses are two highest bus corridors in our system they're not grade separated and they're slow however they come with a high level of service frequency and strong connections with other bus routes that a succesful transit corridor (whatever the mode) needs.
Can you finish that statement. It's not just point to point speed, but connection speed (timed transers, direct feeders, transit center design, real time "Nextbus or Nexttrain" information)
Great! All the more reason to get the Wilshire Purple Line extension going to at least Westwood or to feed Expo.
|
|
|
Post by roadtrainer on Jun 12, 2008 10:27:24 GMT -8
;D Jerard: In the planning for the extension of the Purple Line, has anyone considered curving the line to include Century City and then curving back to Wilshire? Sincerely The Roadtrainer
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Jun 12, 2008 10:57:12 GMT -8
My understanding is that curve has always been part of the plan.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jun 12, 2008 11:45:06 GMT -8
The projected cost of the Iraq war is now reported as $2,700 billion, which is equivalent to 1,600 Expo Lines from Downtown to Santa Monica. How pathetic is this, isn't it, given the condition of the economy and the fact this war has accomplished nothing but to hurt the world peace?
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Jun 12, 2008 12:02:11 GMT -8
The trip from Santa Monica is supposed to take 35 minutes (might be way off here, I'm getting this number just out of my head). I posting this on March 4, my estimated Expo Line timetable (for the right-of-way route option), based on current LA timetables (that also round to the nearest minute). I'll do an update for the subsequently-announced phase 2 station locations and grade-separations, and for the Venice-Sepulveda option. I wouldn't expect it to change by more than a minute or so, though. Note that sections with gated crossings have the same speed as grade separations. Stations | Miles | Max MPH | Avg MPH | Minutes | Flower & 7th | | | | | Flower & Pico | .8 | 55 | 24 | 2 | Flower & 23rd | .8 | 35 | 16 | 3 | Flower & Jefferson | .7 | 35 | 21-14 | 2-3 | Expo & Vermont | .9 | 35 | 18 | 3 | Expo & Western | 1.0 | 35 | 20-15 | 3-4 | Expo & Crenshaw | 1.5 | 55 | 30-23 | 3-4 | Expo & La Brea | 1.1 | 55 | 33 | 2 | Jefferson & La Cienega | 1.0 | 55 | 30 | 2 | Venice & Robertson | 1.0 | 55 | 30 | 2 | Culver City subtotal | 8.8 | | 24-21 | 22-25 | National & Motor | 1.2 | 55 | 36 | 2 | Expo & Westwood | 1.1 | 55 | 33-22 | 2-3 | Expo & Sawtelle | .7 | 55 | 21 | 2 | Expo & Bundy | .9 | 55 | 27 | 2 | Olympic & 26th | 1.1 | 55 | 33 | 2 | Colorado & 14th | .8 | 55 | 24 | 2 | Colorado & 4th | .8 | 35 | 16 | 3 | Santa Monica total | 15.4 | | 25-23 | 37-41 |
|
|
|
Post by jejozwik on Jun 12, 2008 12:02:15 GMT -8
The projected cost of the Iraq war is now reported as $2,700 billion, which is equivalent to 1,600 Expo Lines from Downtown to Santa Monica. How pathetic is this, isn't it, given the condition of the economy and the fact this war has accomplished nothing but to hurt the world peace? thats awesome. ...even if the gov decides to get its act together. we wont see any progress for at least another 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jun 12, 2008 16:49:50 GMT -8
What does it take to build a rail line in LA?! The madness continues. I am completely content with the Expo grade-crossing proposals of Monday evening. Rick Thorpe's comments about treating everyone the same and the financial constraints are excellent, as usual with him. Here is my suggestion: Build this line at-grade, and if doesn't work, later grade-separate the darn automobile lanes above the line!LA Times blog June 10The Westsiders ask for grade separation. Damien laughs, saying, I told you so. Will Expo melt under pressure and grade-separate the Westside? Will Damien then file an EJ suit and have the last laugh, and the train will stop at Venice/Robertson for good? LA Times blog June 9LA Times blog June 4LA Times blog June 3Previous blogs.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Jun 13, 2008 1:40:20 GMT -8
They should build rail lines in LA like they built the first shinkansen in Japan, not ask a single person what they think about it, and just build it.
Most of you act like goddamn children, both online and at these stupid meetings. It's been hilarious watching the drama unfold over this line.
|
|
|
Post by wad on Jun 13, 2008 4:36:51 GMT -8
How pathetic is this, isn't it, given the condition of the economy and the fact this war has accomplished nothing but to hurt the world peace? Pathetic is an understatement. I was also surprised that one day after my lengthy missive on fascism, it only generated one comment -- from you. After I hit send, I was worried I had started a fire that you guys would direct your anger away from Damien to me. Some more clarification is in order. My post on fascism was meant to be a moral not to use this particular form of government as a synonym for a slur against a particular government action we happen to hate. Already, "fascism," "Nazi" and "Hitler" have been thrown around so cavalierly that when a real form of fascism does come, Americans won't even know it had arrived in the first place. Calling Bush a fascist is regarded as an epithet. It's fatuous and insulting. Yet, Bush's administration of the country has haunting parallels in style and substance to Mussolini's Italy. Yet what are we supposed to call it? Even in 2008, the Bush administration has proven to be so catastrophic, partisan and ideological cohorts are disowning this regime. The damage has been done, and we've only begun to see the small waves of the perfect storm a-comin'. On the other hand, you mentioned the NIMBY problem. Rather than a problem of NIMBY fascism -- property owners lack most of the foundations to even have a fascist, or fastening, movement -- there's another more pernicious social system we have to worry about from them. Feudalism. Homeowners are not going to don their brownshirts and jackboots to destroy the society for the purposes of living out a national mythology. Homeowners are only going to take us back to the Dark Ages. NIMBYs organize primarily as an economic bloc to protect their property values. NIMBYism, at its core, is a war of economics. NIMBYs believe it is their self-interest to protect their land as their source of wealth. Anything in their backyard is a competing economic agent that results in less gain. The NIMBYs money and influence are both diminished. NIMBYism, taken to its logical conclusion, will have a few wealthy property owners who'll prevent every other form of economic good from developing because it is in their self-interest for the whole economy to be about keeping their land values as high as possible. Plus, feudalism is still a relatively benign term compared to fascism.
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Jun 13, 2008 6:09:16 GMT -8
Well, if you guys wants to build a rail line in my backyard come on over. I'll welcome it ;D
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 13, 2008 8:37:51 GMT -8
I think the Sepulveda crossing should be grade-separated, due to the impact on north-south traffic. The level-of-service (calculated by MTA) at that location is currently grade B. In 2030, the MTA projects a grade C in 2030 if nothing is built, and a grade D if Expo is built at-grade. To me, that's a big hit.
I also think the Barrington crossing should be grade-separated. That crossing is at grade D now, and is projected to remain at grade D under both scenarios (build vs. no-build).
I feel more strongly about the Sepulveda crossing. At least with Barrington at-grade, you'll continue to have Bundy and Sawtelle as alternates. If Sepulveda is at-grade, all of the major north-south streets just east of the 405 are going to be crossed at-grade. IOW, there will be no way of avoiding the train without doing a jog west to Sawtelle. And this will cause increased traffic on Pico, Olympic, etc.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 13, 2008 8:48:56 GMT -8
Suppose Expo were continuously grade-separated for the appx. 1.3 miles from Bundy to Sepulveda. Then the line would have zero impact on Bundy, Barrington, Pico/Gateway, Sawtelle and Sepulveda - IOW, five streets with notoriously bad traffic.
BTW, are they thinking about doing this elevated, or underground? Either way is fine with me. I would think elevated would cost less, but I don't know enough about the specific geology of the area to really know.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Fernandez on Jun 13, 2008 9:38:43 GMT -8
But we can't do that now because of Damien's work.
With a Sepulveda HRT line, would any of these grade separations really be necessary? It seems not to me. But because of that, we have to keep in mind road traffic as the priority for north-south travel.
The MTA is really in a bind. They really have to grade-separate at least one of those crossings, but if they do then that only gives Damien's environmental justice lawsuit more evidence. So, how do you mitigate this?
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Jun 13, 2008 11:06:28 GMT -8
But we can't do that now because of Damien's work. They could theoretically add one more grade separation to keep things in balance between Phase 1 and Phase 2. Most of the problems with Westwood and Overland is that the street lanes are poorly designed and in the case of Westwood lack signals are not suited for the volumes of traffic they have. Before they can consider grade separations as a last resort they have to look at the existing street configuration and see if there is room for improvement within the existing street right of way. I lived in the area for 5 years and I believe that would help a lot more than a grade separation because what good does that do when the road is still a mess. At first I was going to say Huh? But I see the point you're making in that if there is a Van Nuys-405-Sepulveda corridor that will funnel a lot of riders from the local area to use the transit line. Making the grade separation issues minute. Unfortunately we are not building said line right away, but will need a series of regional point to point express routes feeding Expo coming from the 405 Freeway. Not neccessarily, because they are looking at mitigations early in the DEIR, if the mitigation is proven with sufficient evidence to be impossible to impliment then they can't use it against them because they went through the process of keeping Metro's Grade Crossing criteria objectively while understanding site limitations.This is why Washington/National is grade separated to go along with Venice Blvd because of the very close proximity of these crossings. This is why Sawtelle/Gateway will have a grade separation because of the close proximity to Pico Blvd which will need grade separation. This is also why La Brea Avenue went from at-grade to elevated due to the close proximity to Jefferson Blvd for southbound La Brea auto traffic.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jun 13, 2008 11:07:36 GMT -8
I think the Sepulveda crossing should be grade-separated, due to the impact on north-south traffic. The level-of-service (calculated by MTA) at that location is currently grade B. In 2030, the MTA projects a grade C in 2030 if nothing is built, and a grade D if Expo is built at-grade. To me, that's a big hit. metrocenter, this is actually incorrect. The figures provided for Exposition/Sepulveda are for the diversion option. The right-of-way option was approved earlier and they didn't have the figures for it in Monday's presentation.
|
|
|
Post by JerardWright on Jun 13, 2008 11:14:23 GMT -8
BTW, are they thinking about doing this elevated, or underground? Either way is fine with me. I would think elevated would cost less, but I don't know enough about the specific geology of the area to really know. It's fairly sandy because a creek use to run through so it would be an elevated besides there is a major storm line under Exposition from Sepulveda to Overland just like Farmdale
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jun 13, 2008 11:15:33 GMT -8
Suppose Expo were continuously grade-separated for the appx. 1.3 miles from Bundy to Sepulveda. Then the line would have zero impact on Bundy, Barrington, Pico/Gateway, Sawtelle and Sepulveda - IOW, five streets with notoriously bad traffic. I will simply quote Mr. Steve Hymon's conversation with Expo CEO Mr. Rick Thorpe: "I just got off the phone with Rick Thorpe, the president of the Expo Line Construction Authority. He first confirmed that he survived the meeting -- no small task, in my view -- and then explained the authority's reasoning for putting the train at-grade.
'We're trying to treat everyone the same in Los Angeles County because everyone would prefer grade-separated crossings for their light rail lines,' Thorpe said. 'But it doesn't make sense to do that. If we did, we wouldn't have enough money to build anything.'
He said that the authority had three different traffic engineers look at the crossings and determine that they could work with the mitigations in place."BTW, are they thinking about doing this elevated, or underground? Either way is fine with me. I would think elevated would cost less, but I don't know enough about the specific geology of the area to really know. All Phase 2 grade separations are to be elevated, except for the use of the existing 25-ft-wide, 350-ft-long Palms Overhead below I-10.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jun 13, 2008 11:28:51 GMT -8
With a Sepulveda HRT line, would any of these grade separations really be necessary? It seems not to me. But because of that, we have to keep in mind road traffic as the priority for north-south travel. It will be more likely a Red Line extension from the Highland/Hollywood terminus, which is expected to have a nearly as high ridership as the Purple Line extension from the Western/Wilshire terminus, since it will take away from I-405 and Sepulveda many Valley commuters going to the job centers in the Westside everyday.
|
|