|
Post by jeisenbe on Nov 21, 2009 15:02:41 GMT -8
I voted for between Barrington and Federal, if the VA can provide a shuttle bus from the station to the hospital. However, between Federal and the VA would be okay, if dual portals are provided AND the VA is able to provide land for park-and-ride or TOD.
If no station is picked, the nearest stations will be at Bundy (0.7 miles from Wilshire/Federal) and Westwood (1.1 mile from Wilshire/Federal). Barrington is 1/8 mile from Federal.
The VA is theoretically only 1/3 mile from Wilshire/Federal, but the shortest walk currently possible takes 1/2 mile due to the lack of a straight east-west path. It is also a little uphill. Even worse, the grade-separated (elevated) interchange of Westwood at the VA is designed for cars, so walking to the Westwood station is 1.2 miles from the front enterance, up along Wilshire and under the freeway, or 1.3 miles from the back of the hospital, down Ohio and Westwood. If "No Station" is your choice, the VA will really need good bus service from Westwood. Those vets in wheelchairs won't be going over a mile on the street.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Nov 21, 2009 16:39:06 GMT -8
The VA is theoretically only 1/3 mile from Wilshire/Federal, but the shortest walk currently possible takes 1/2 mile due to the lack of a straight east-west path. It is also a little uphill. Even worse, the grade-separated (elevated) interchange of Westwood at the VA is designed for cars, so walking to the Westwood station is 1.2 miles from the front enterance, up along Wilshire and under the freeway, or 1.3 miles from the back of the hospital, down Ohio and Westwood. If "No Station" is your choice, the VA will really need good bus service from Westwood. Those vets in wheelchairs won't be going over a mile on the street. There is a ring road in the VA that could connect to Wilshire Federal through the back of that property (the area facing the VA) that provides a direct route to the hospital, and I get a little less than 1/3 mile. I am not sure about it being uphill, it is pretty flat but the hospital itself is on a slight rise. At the station meeting, the VA rep. talked about making wherever the station is to have it accessible to the hospital users, so they will ensure any sidewalks in the VA to the hospital would accomodate their patrons. Also, the option to have it between the hospital and Federal isn't really possible because that area is where the few residences that the VA has including its director are located and the VA doesn't want a station there.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Nov 22, 2009 23:15:06 GMT -8
maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=11700+Wilshire+Blvd.&sll=34.050046,-118.460469&sspn=0.008,0.013754&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=11700+Wilshire+Blvd,+Los+Angeles,+California+90025&ll=34.049104,-118.461263&spn=0.008001,0.013754&t=h&z=16 Here is the Google Map image of Federal/Barrington and the VA (don't think I can do a screenshot w/o Photoshop). You can see the VA Hospital at the far east with the 405 just beyond. The VA's open green spaces and large surface parking lots really contrasts with the dense city to the West of Federal. However, this image doesn't really do justice to the density of the area west of Federal. The high rises on Wilshire and the density of the 4 story block of apartments on the side streets needs to be viewed from the streetview mode as on the satellite image on Google Maps, everything looks like it is one story. If you do a streetview between Barrington/Wilshire and the VA Hospital you can see the stunning difference even though the two areas are so close to each other.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Nov 23, 2009 7:05:09 GMT -8
The reason I voted for Barrington as the westernmost end of the line (frankly, I think that Bundy might even be better) is that the PURPOSE of this station is to provide an alternative and mitigation to the dreadful backlog of traffic on Wilshire that crosses the 405 freeway.
The VA hospital has its own problems and issues, but in and of itself it shouldn't eclipse the purpose of the small extension of the line west of the 405.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Nov 23, 2009 9:49:46 GMT -8
^ I agree, Ken. The westernmost station should be far enough west that it doesn't require a slog through traffic to get to it.
Even better, I'm warming up to the idea of sending it south on Bundy to a terminus at Expo/Bundy.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Nov 23, 2009 14:15:28 GMT -8
> "Even better, I'm warming up to the idea of sending it south on Bundy to a terminus at Expo/Bundy."
Metrocenter, that would be better than ending at Barrington or Federal, if there is no money to extend the line to downtown Santa Monica. However, a subway from Westwood to Bundy and Exposition via the VA would still be almost 2.8 miles long, versus 4.2 miles to 4th and Wilshire. I would rather end the subway at Barrington for now (well, in 10 years), and extend it straight down Wilshire when money becomes available.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Nov 23, 2009 15:04:03 GMT -8
The reason I voted for Barrington as the westernmost end of the line (frankly, I think that Bundy might even be better) is that the PURPOSE of this station is to provide an alternative and mitigation to the dreadful backlog of traffic on Wilshire that crosses the 405 freeway. The VA hospital has its own problems and issues, but in and of itself it shouldn't eclipse the purpose of the small extension of the line west of the 405. Originally, the MTA said it was between Bundy and Barrington for the end station for MOS 3. They then said that Bundy was too far west for MOS 3 and that they didn't have funds to get it there so it would be between Barrington and the VA. They pretty much are saying the same thing in selecting the VA now in that they just don't want to spend a little more money to go to Barrington. However, as we have pointed out having a station right up against the freeway in a no-development zone pretty much defeats the purpose of having this station. San Vicente dumps a bunch of traffic on Wilshire with no additional capacity on Wilshire creating a lot of the gridlock. Ironically, this is because the VA serves as a giant barrier for miles all the way up to Sunset and all traffic is funneled onto Wilshire here creating the nightmare gridlock. Bundy would have been ideal for a western terminus for MOS 3 with a direct north-south bus running up the street to connect to Expo, but Barrington would at least be a reasonable compromise (busses could be reprogrammed to serve between Expo and the Purple Line here). Also, the real tragedy is by selecting the VA location, this means Barrington will not get a station in any phase even if MOS 5 were to take the line to Santa Monica, which is doubtful unless Expo is completely overwhelmed with ridership.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Nov 23, 2009 16:41:20 GMT -8
This can easily be done be rerouting BBB14. Right now it goes North on Bundy until Montana then east on Montana until Barrington, then north on Barrington. If the BBB14 went north on Bundy to Wilshire, then east on Wilshire to Barrington, then north on Barrington, you pretty much serve the same area. The BBB3 already serves Montana between Bundy and San Vicente.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Nov 23, 2009 16:45:42 GMT -8
I voted Barrington, but I am curious about the future Sepulveda Pass project in Measure R.
Could Metro also be thinking of the VA as the transfer station for this project, especially if it is LRT or BRT, as building a transfer station at Westwood/Wilshire doesn't seem to be on the radar. That would increase the ridership in the future.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Nov 23, 2009 17:04:56 GMT -8
I voted Barrington, but I am curious about the future Sepulveda Pass project in Measure R. Could Metro also be thinking of the VA as the transfer station for this project, especially if it is LRT or BRT, as building a transfer station at Westwood/Wilshire doesn't seem to be on the radar. That would increase the ridership in the future. I think with the Sepulveda Pass Project, they are thinking that this would connect at Westwood with a station just north of it at UCLA. This way UCLA would get direct service, which some are complaining about now with the Purple Line. It would be pretty natural for this line just continue down Westwood Blvd. to Expo. Of course, this is just speculation for now as this Sepulveda Pass Line hasn't even had a study for it yet so who knows.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Nov 23, 2009 22:09:51 GMT -8
...at the risk of sounding obstructionist, but I think it's entirely premature to discuss the end of MOS 3 at this point, and I think it's a dreadful mistake not to make sure this goes to Bundy.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Nov 24, 2009 8:58:09 GMT -8
...at the risk of sounding obstructionist, but I think it's entirely premature to discuss the end of MOS 3 at this point, and I think it's a dreadful mistake not to make sure this goes to Bundy. I don't think you are being obstructionist at all. However, it's not premature as Metro seems to have already made their decision that the western end of MOS3 will be a VA area station.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Nov 24, 2009 12:10:54 GMT -8
...at the risk of sounding obstructionist, but I think it's entirely premature to discuss the end of MOS 3 at this point, and I think it's a dreadful mistake not to make sure this goes to Bundy. I don't think you are being obstructionist at all. However, it's not premature as Metro seems to have already made their decision that the western end of MOS3 will be a VA area station. Just because Metro has said they have decided to study the VA location only at this time doesn't necessarily mean this is set in stone. After all, look at the Regional Connector, which may be studying a new alignment option now, which is much more of a change than the location of a station. My hope is that Metro realizes (with a bunch of people like us pointing the way) that putting a station in the middle of the VA as opposed to Barrington/Federal is an extremely poor decision that will only hurt the ridership of the line for the eternal future. Our poll so far suggests there is little support for the current option (no votes in our poll) and I imagine the overall community and stakeholders feel much the same way (I know quite a few people at the last station meeting had this opinion). It is a matter of making sure the politicians and staffers making the decisions, hear and answer to these concerns. It is a shame that these critical station decisions don't get more press coverage. I bet 95% or more of the people in West LA as well as the workers and visitors coming into this area every day have no idea that the VA station is the location selected by the MTA right now.
|
|
|
Post by stuckintraffic on Nov 24, 2009 14:18:04 GMT -8
I voted for Wilshire between Federal and Barrington.
However, I do see Metro's inclination to put this amongst parking. There needs to be some sort of park-and-ride lots/structure somewhere along the line. Right now, IIRC there are none. This is LA and let's face it -- not everyone lives close enough to walk or is willing to use the bus to get to the subway.
Look at it this way: Let's say you live Santa Monica/west Brentwood/Pacific Palisades and want to go downtown. It's waaaayyy too far to walk there. However, if there are lots by the end of the line, it would at least give far westsiders an option to still use the line.
However, the whole right-to-parking-at-the-VA mess about which masonite spoke in another post does throw a monkey wrench into the whole thing...
I think the station between Wilshire/Federal and Wilshire Barrington should have some access to parking on the VA land. How lots or structures could be built there is another issue that needs hammering out...
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Dec 3, 2009 16:16:15 GMT -8
Considering that many think the Gold Line's poor ridership is partially due to such poor station placement, I will be even more disillusioned if Metro does not change this as this would be the worst station location decision I have seen. I mean the VA itself is the main reason for the extreme traffic problem here as all East West streets in the area dead end into the VA except Wilshire, where everything else is routed to creating a nightmare bottleneck. The whole idea behind this station was to alleviate this bottleneck or at least give people the option of not having to go through it to access the subway. Metro's solution is to put it right in the middle of the bottleneck, which if anything will create an even bigger problem as more busses and cars (if there is parking) will now have to go through this narrow corridor. What is even more ridiculous is the fact that the Westwood and VA stations will be among the closest placed stations in the entire rail system for the County (about 0.5 miles) if the UCLA Lot is picked for Westwood as expected. You'd think for this there would be good density and transit use between the two areas, but except for the Federal Building, which is just across the street from the Westwood station, there is no possible use here for someone traveling on rail as there is just a cemetary, a freeway, and empty land that can never be developed between the two. It will be a travesty to spend billions on a subway and locate a station like this . I have written Metro and Zev on this and I encourage others to do so if they feel the same as it seems based on our poll that others do.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Dec 4, 2009 9:10:43 GMT -8
I'm still not clear WHY the V.A. only is being studied instead of a stop between Barrington and Federal, with a portal on Barrington and a portal on Federal to a possible park and ride.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Dec 4, 2009 15:10:41 GMT -8
A station at VA only makes sense if there is a connection there to a 405 line. I will be interested to see Metro's numbers for projected boardings/performance of this station.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Dec 4, 2009 16:29:06 GMT -8
A station at VA only makes sense if there is a connection there to a 405 line. I will be interested to see Metro's numbers for projected boardings/performance of this station. That is still a possibility. However, since the 405 Line (405 is really not a good name for this line as it should really be called a Valley to Westside Line) has not been studied, there is no real thought if it would connect here. I imagine it might be slightly cheaper to do it through here than Westwood, but I would think Westwood would be a much stronger candidate, because it could include a UCLA station into the system, Westwood is much more of a destination for Valley residents than the VA, which would require them to transfer to the Purple Line if they were going to Westwood, and it seems as if this line were ever to go south it would be much easier to do so along a street like Sepulveda than from the VA.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Jan 15, 2010 7:25:50 GMT -8
Thank you, masonite for contacting me about this problem--I wrote my first CityWatch article about it, and I'm absolutely NOT going to let it go.
The VA is no place for a MOS-3 terminus, and it's too darn preliminary to even be concluding that we know where the terminus should be.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Jan 15, 2010 8:13:09 GMT -8
Again, I'm not going to let this one go. The maps didn't make it to this post, but can be found on line with the link below (and I've already been advised that I confused MOS-4 with MOS-5, but I suspect that all readers will understand what I'm talking about): citywatchla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3099The Wilshire Subway: Oh, Say, Can You Sea? MOVING LA By Ken Alpern Whether the Subway to the Sea will ever reach the Sea, or whether students from UC can travel the future Purple Line to the Sea, or whether we’ll ever be able to see the Sea from wherever the Subway reaches its sea-most terminus is still an unanswered question…you see. I give lots of props to Subway/Purple Line Metro staff like David Mieger and Jody Litvak, who have worked tirelessly on this and other projects for years, so my critique on where the currently-proposed terminus west of the 405 isn’t so much a slam on their work as much as it is a reminder that we’re putting the proverbial cart way too far ahead of the horse…or, perhaps, the railcar ahead of the tracks. (Please contact David Mieger or Jody Litvak at WestsideExtension@metro.net. This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it for all of your comments and/or questions—they’re first-rate at gathering and evaluating input) The Westside Subway (of which the Wilshire Blvd. segment is called the Purple Line) will be built in Minimal Operating Segments that are functional extensions that are individual “chapters” in the completion of this line. Each segment will likely take years for the funding, design and construction to occur. The first MOS (MOS-1) is roughly to Fairfax/La Cienega, MOS-2 is from Fairfax/La Cienega to Century City, MOS-3 is from Century City to somewhere just west of the 405 freeway and includes Westwood, MOS-4 is from the 405 freeway to the beach, and MOS-5 is the popular connecting segment between the Red and Purple Lines down Santa Monica and Fairfax. A project as huge as the Wilshire Subway is just too darn big and expensive to do it all at once—which is probably a good thing, because as this project moves further west the uncertainty regarding station and routing details increase, and resident/political consensus becomes more elusive. For this very reason, I’ve heard different folks describe which MOS should be MOS-4 or MOS-5, because the need to extend this line to the beach doesn’t at all enjoy as much support and consensus as does the need to connect the Red and Purple Lines…and the question has been frequently asked as to whether the money to bring the Purple Line all the way from the 405 freeway to the beach isn’t better spent on expanding the budget to create a connecting rail line from the San Fernando Valley to the Westside and maybe to LAX. Nobody really knows much about that “405 Line” between the Valley and the Westside, either. Ask ten folks for ideas and you’ll get ten different ideas—should it be above or below ground, should it be alongside the 405 or bore underground to come up in the Valley at Van Nuys Blvd., should it be light or heavy rail, etc.? I am entirely baffled as to the entire lack of organized grassroots support for such a “405 rail line” despite the innumerable individuals who’ve raised the idea as one that remains overdue and unresolved. Perhaps when the Expo and Purple Lines become realities instead of science fiction will such a “405 rail line” project be taken more seriously…but it will compete for dollars and planning with a Purple Line that goes all the way to the beach. At this time, the Purple Line Subway appears to be on its way to meeting several key goals, such as suggesting the best future connections to the future Crenshaw Light Rail Line at La Brea or thereabouts, to Century City and to the Beverly Center and to Westwood. The Purple Line planning effort does NOT, however, at this time address the traffic crunch on Wilshire Blvd. that starts west of the freeway and makes it a nightmare to traverse one side of the 405 to the other. At this time, for financial, logistic and other purposes the western terminus of MOS-3 (to Westwood/405 freeway) is favored to be at the Westwood/VA Hospital. Traffic is monstrous well to the west of the hospital, however, and issues such as parking and access to federal property are HUGE and make this a much thornier problem to resolve than most of us realize (memba’ getting the Green Line to LAX and working with those fun-loving feds?). Any station at the VA Hospital will (rightfully) serve primarily the needs of the patients and workers there…but not the needs of the general public. Unfortunately, a proposed compromise of having the western terminus of MOS-3 at/near the western edge of the VA property at Federal (near Barrington) is not proceeding forward; the hospital continues to be the favored western terminus. Meanwhile, huge commuter/pedestrian destinations on Barrington and Bundy exist to the west, as does the aforementioned 405 freeway-clustered traffic. Bundy was the original western terminus of MOS-3, but has now been relegated to MOS-4 to Santa Monica and the beach at a time when there are no shortage of individuals wondering if we need this Purple Line to go all the way to the beach. So…why would Wilshire Blvd. commuters jump on board the Purple Line Subway if they’ve already fought through most of the traffic to get to the 405 freeway? Might we consider including Wilshire/Bundy as the western terminus of MOS-3, and cancel MOS-4 for now since Santa Monica will get its Expo Line and other priorities of connecting the Valley and the Westside via the “405 rail line” and the Red-Purple Line connection (MOS-5) also exist? Most importantly, with the understanding that we have no idea of if, how or where the 405 rail line will connect to UCLA and the Purple Line, why are we committing so far in advance to the VA vs. Barrington vs. Bundy? The Wilshire Subway might not get the political and budgetary blessings to move further west than a Fairfax/La Cienega Blvd. Extension by 2015-18. However, it packs a much greater ridership, planning and economic punch if it can be built in a longer first-phase to Century City by that time. That still gives us lots of time to talk with the folks at Metro, the VA and with both the political and grassroots entities of West Los Angeles, the San Fernando Valley and Santa Monica to figure out what we want west of the 405 freeway. I look forward to what reasonable folks who really want this line can achieve with long-term visioning while more immediate extensions to Century City and Westwood can be prioritized. And, on a final note… …between cancelling classes and raising student tuitions, it might behoove UCLA to finally lead a visioning process of the once and future 405 rail line as well as the Purple Line effort. How and where will its station(s) be, and what kind of Westside and Valley links fit the need of UCLA students, workers and faculties, to say nothing of Valley/Westside commuters in general. As I see it, the Subway to the Sea needs to be seen as a sea change for how we see comprehensive rail networking and urban planning for the seaside neighborhoods of West LA and Santa Monica. And as for the UC that should oversee this Subway to the Sea…I grade it as best a “C”. (Ken Alpern is a Boardmember of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC) and is both co-chair of the MVCC Transportation/Infrastructure Committee and past co-chair of the MVCC Planning/Land Use Management Committee. He is co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and also chairs the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at Alpern@MarVista.org.This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it The views expressed in this article are solely those of Mr. Alpern.) CityWatch Vol 8 Issue 4 Pub: Jan 15, 2010
|
|
|
Post by erict on Jan 15, 2010 12:31:11 GMT -8
fantastic article. I also have wondered why there is no strong call (i.e. Foothill Gold) for a 405 rail line. Maybe people on the 405 enjoy all that traffic? I doubt it.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Jan 15, 2010 13:17:07 GMT -8
Thanks for the kind words, Eric.
It's simply that no one has had the temerity to form a nucleus around which others could rally. Darrell did it for the Expo Line. For a few years, I did it for getting the Green Line to LAX. No one in the Valley or Westside is willing to assume that role...but once someone does, things'll get rolling quickly.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Jan 23, 2010 20:25:10 GMT -8
Here are some photos from the VA station location and at Barrington to compare. This one is right at where the most probably VA station location will be with Wilshire viewable on the right side. Some of the areas of the VA are incredibly open. This one below is from an area a few hundred yards from the station location. The VA isn't the most welcoming area even though this is quasi-public land - below. Here is Barrington from both an East and West view below.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Jan 24, 2010 19:25:11 GMT -8
Thanks for the photos, masonite. I think several things will happen in the years to come:
1) There will be a growing surprise when this happens sooner and not later (perhaps it'll be no surprise, and we'll only see this Subway make it to Century City over the next 10 years and folks will ignore this issue for now)
2) There will be a VA freakout when all sorts of people want to access the VA to get to the subway
3) There will be a growing "OMG!" when people realize that this isn't going to Barrington or Bundy, and that those one or two stop shouldn't have to be shoved into a Santa Monica link that potentially isn't needed at all
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Jan 24, 2010 20:39:15 GMT -8
Thanks for the photos, masonite. I think several things will happen in the years to come: 1) There will be a growing surprise when this happens sooner and not later (perhaps it'll be no surprise, and we'll only see this Subway make it to Century City over the next 10 years and folks will ignore this issue for now) 2) There will be a VA freakout when all sorts of people want to access the VA to get to the subway 3) There will be a growing "OMG!" when people realize that this isn't going to Barrington or Bundy, and that those one or two stop shouldn't have to be shoved into a Santa Monica link that potentially isn't needed at all Ken, hopefully, you are right. However, I think the more people realize sooner the better. After all aren't people still in amazement they built the Green Line without connecting it to LAX, one of the busiest airports in the world, and here we are 15 years later and a connection is at best many years into the future? Similarly, I think people still think many of the Gold Line stations are not where they should be, but they still were built this way. Unfortunately, I think if the MTA is hell bent on building a station there, without public and political outcry at the very beginning, that is what will happen. One thing you really notice when you are in the VA is how inhospitable it is to the general public. Say you arrive at the VA station and want to go to Santa Monica Blvd. From Barrington or Federal this is an easy downhill walk a few blocks to the South. In the VA it is along a long circular drive that sends you far to the West and then back East, because there is no street grid in there. When I took these pictures, the VA gate at Ohio was closed to traffic and pedestrians so there was no way out at all even if you did that long walk. Now I would suppose there would be pressure on the VA to change that if a station was built there, but the VA is under no obligation to open those gates. After all, why would they want the general public roaming their grounds for access to a subway station. That is not their mission and just creates problems for them. This would be urban planning at its worst as forcing incompatible uses on a property. They would be making what is likely to be the only west of 405 subway station for a huge community and putting it in a place where the public isn't even welcome! This happens while some of the few areas in all of Southern California that have the density to support this type of rail go wanting.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jan 24, 2010 23:17:16 GMT -8
A Brentwood station, spanning Wilshire from Federal to Barrington, probably makes the most sense. There is lots of density there. (Although judging from recent efforts, the NIMBYs might freak out at the possibility of doing anything that might encourage more development there.)
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Jan 24, 2010 23:59:16 GMT -8
A Brentwood station, spanning Wilshire from Federal to Barrington, probably makes the most sense. There is lots of density there. (Although judging from recent efforts, the NIMBYs might freak out at the possibility of doing anything that might encourage more development there.) Once the Purple Line starts creeping westward (at least past Fairfax)...I'm sure their heads will turn. For example.....San Gabriel Valley.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Jan 25, 2010 11:42:26 GMT -8
One correction, Ken. According to page 22 of the Scoping PresentationMOS-4 is the West Hollywood Branch. Bundy has been reassigned to MOS-5, the Santa Monica branch The question of a 405 line is interesting. There is discussion of the project that connects Westwood and the Valley in Measure R, and Bill Rosendahl is pushing a Lincoln LRT, which is now a Tier 2 Strategic Plan project. However, I think the Lincoln project can wait till after a larger Sepulveda-based project between LAX and Van Nuys Metrolink (and perhaps someday Sylmar Metrolink) which has tremendous regional value. Some people want to see heavy rail underneath Van Nuys Blvd, which could transfer with the Purple Line at Westwood. One that runs closer to Sepulveda Blvd. would probably transfer at this new V.A. station. (I still prefer a station between Barrington and Federal, but that's no longer in the cards.)
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Jan 25, 2010 14:02:08 GMT -8
However, I think the Lincoln project can wait till after a larger Sepulveda-based project between LAX and Van Nuys Metrolink (and perhaps someday Sylmar Metrolink) which has tremendous regional value. Some people want to see heavy rail underneath Van Nuys Blvd, which could transfer with the Purple Line at Westwood. One that runs closer to Sepulveda Blvd. would probably transfer at this new V.A. station. (I still prefer a station between Barrington and Federal, but that's no longer in the cards.) Keep in mind, Sepulveda is about the same distance to the proposed Westwood station as it is to the VA. Also, by connecting this 405 line to Westwood this would allow two major positive outcomes to happen. One, would be you could then have a UCLA station directly on campus or right next to it. Currently, from the North side of campus it would be a very very long walk to the Westwood station and even from the South side of campus it is probably too long to attract a great deal of ridership. Second, Westwood Village is a major destination in and of itself for transit users. By making them go to the VA and then transfer on the Purple Line, you are cutting out a lot of ridership as transfers kill ridership.
|
|
|
Post by kenalpern on Jan 25, 2010 17:28:22 GMT -8
Great thoughts, folks!
Part of the problem is that NO ONE has any idea wha the 405 line ought to be, and therefore any guessing/planning it as a certainty is like trying to predict where stocks will be in 2025.
At the risk of sounding obnoxious, considering how pushy the VA folks were to having their own station, and not at Barrington/Federal, I look forward to them being in the spotlight when everyone in the region all want to access that VA property and park. Veterans' rights, anyone? Overdevelopment on VA property, anyone?
...and then I suspect that a betterment of getting the line to Bundy and having it terminate there instead of at the VA will get back into the spotlight...or we'll see the Westside and West Hollywood duke it out over whether this critical link has to wait until MOS-5 (or if MOS-5 is even needed at all).
|
|