|
Post by fissure on Jan 11, 2012 10:06:10 GMT -8
That reminds me - how would it get here to/from Adams (which I presume is the next stop southbound)? Do you do a straight shot and go under some properties or do you go all the way up Crenshaw to Venice and turn on Venice to get here (which is a much longer route, of course)? You bring up an interesting point that I think we rarely talk about. I think this all depends on where the Mid-city station is located, because continuing on Crenshaw all the way to Venice I don't think would be THAT inconvenient. However, if it was closer to Pico/San Vincente (instead of Venice/West), I think the time savings could be worth it to continue straight underground and avoid running on Venice. Since you'd presumably want to use San Vicente's wide median to save money by running at-grade, it probably makes sense to have the station under San Vicente just south of Pico so the station box and the tunnel<->at-grade transition box can be one thing instead of having to dig a short tunnel segment between them. It would be similar to Mariachi Plaza on the Gold Line.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Feb 23, 2012 9:50:09 GMT -8
I don't know how much this means, but Move LA has put the San Vicente / Santa Monica Blvd. alignment in their map (and a Sepulveda alignment between Sylmar and LAX).
|
|
|
Post by carter on Feb 23, 2012 12:46:29 GMT -8
I don't know how much this means, but Move LA has put the San Vicente / Santa Monica Blvd. alignment in their map (and a Sepulveda alignment between Sylmar and LAX). I think it's important in so far as Move LA is an important voice for transit in the region, but I wouldn't read into it much further than that. Do you have a link to a bigger version of that photo, btw? Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Feb 23, 2012 13:22:07 GMT -8
I would love to find one. If I do, I'll share it.
|
|
|
Post by jamprit on Feb 23, 2012 14:15:55 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Feb 23, 2012 14:52:01 GMT -8
I would love to find one. If I do, I'll share it. The "original" is in this blog post, which is also small. They have my preferred routing for the Sepulveda and Crenshaw lines, though I would make explicit that Green line service should go from Santa Fe Springs to Sylmar, while Crenshaw service should be Hollywood to South Bay.
|
|
K 22
Full Member
Posts: 117
|
Post by K 22 on Mar 21, 2012 6:44:04 GMT -8
Since this applies to this topic, here's the plan for La Cienega station on the Purple Line from the FEIR: And here's Fairfax:
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Mar 21, 2012 9:18:20 GMT -8
Thank you K22
Either one could make for an easy transfer for a SanVicente/Wilshire or Fairfax/Wilshire station for the "Rose" Line.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Mar 21, 2012 9:37:07 GMT -8
Since this applies to this topic, here's the plan for La Cienega station on the Purple Line from the FEIR: And here's Fairfax: They will only build one exit at La Cienega, but what about the staging area by Gale Drive. Hopefully they will have knockout panels put in place there. It would be great if they could somehow dictate that any subsequent use of the staging area would be required to add subway access.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 21, 2012 10:49:13 GMT -8
They will only build one exit at La Cienega, but what about the staging area by Gale Drive. Hopefully they will have knockout panels put in place there. It would be great if they could somehow dictate that any subsequent use of the staging area would be required to add subway access. I'm not trying to hijack the topic, but I understand nearly every Metro station has knockout panels (you can actually see this quite clearly), but has Metro ever actually knocked out a panel and made an additional entrance subsequent to the station opening? I understand there are bids out there for the North Hollywood station knockout panel to add a new entrance across Lankershim. And I remember hearing something about adding a new entrance to Universal City so people don't have to walk across the street to the tram. But, has this EVER happened that Metro or a developer subseqently opened up a new entrance? If any stations deserve this right now, it's both North Hollywood and Hollywood/Highland (due to the annual Grammy's closure, which is ridiculous).
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Apr 26, 2012 14:48:25 GMT -8
Now that the EIR for the Purple Line extension has passed Metro, theoretically, they could go forward planning the Crenshaw/LAX extension to Hollywood.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Apr 26, 2012 15:03:05 GMT -8
Now that the EIR for the Purple Line extension has passed Metro, theoretically, they could go forward planning the Crenshaw/LAX extension to Hollywood. It would have to be included in the next Long Range Plan before planning could take place. It currently is in unfunded so funding would have to be found including that for planning.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Apr 26, 2012 15:41:31 GMT -8
Now that the EIR for the Purple Line extension has passed Metro, theoretically, they could go forward planning the Crenshaw/LAX extension to Hollywood. It would have to be included in the next Long Range Plan before planning could take place. It currently is in unfunded so funding would have to be found including that for planning. Well, it is already included as a Tier 1 unfunded project in Metro's Long Range Transportation Plan, but you are correct, funding for this study would need to be found. But at least it is in the LRTP somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Apr 27, 2012 13:44:38 GMT -8
I can see this project being constructed in phases a la the Purple Line.
Here's what I imagine (assuming they choose the San Vicente/Santa Monica alignment):
MOS-1: Wilshire Blvd.-Beverly Hills --Crenshaw/Adams --San Vicente/Venice/Pico/Rimpau --San Vicente/Olympic/Fairfax --San Vicente/Wilshire
MOS-2: Santa Monica Blvd.-West Hollywood --San Vicente/Beverly --San Vicente/Santa Monica
MOS-3: Hollywood/Highland-Hollywood --Santa Monica/La Cienega* --Santa Monica/Fairfax --Santa Monica/La Brea --Hollywood/Highland
*(possibly not needed due to close proximity to San Vicente)
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Apr 30, 2012 8:21:27 GMT -8
MOS-3: Hollywood/Highland-Hollywood --Santa Monica/La Cienega* --Santa Monica/Fairfax --Santa Monica/La Brea --Hollywood/Highland *(possibly not needed due to close proximity to San Vicente) If Metro goes with this alignment, the proposed stop that was included on the Westside subway extension study was between San Vicente and La Cienega. So I don't believe there would be a separate stop specifically for La Cienega on that alignment.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Apr 30, 2012 10:21:43 GMT -8
Just out of curiosity Dan, would you prefer a stop on San Vicente or La Cienega on Santa Monica Blvd.? Personally, I think San Vicente is a little bit more central, but La Cienega would be nice too.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Apr 30, 2012 11:38:39 GMT -8
Well, central for whom would be my question?
While San Vicente is central if you are going to/from the nightclubs, but La Cienega is more central if you happen to live in the higher density apartments.
If this alignment is chosen, I think having the stop on Santa Monica between San Vicente and La Cienega was a good compromise choice.
|
|
|
Post by andert on May 1, 2014 11:41:32 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on May 1, 2014 16:50:57 GMT -8
I think when it comes to extending the Crenshaw Line, it's either Long Beach or San Pedro, not both. And honestly, Long Beach just makes more sense. Trying to go to San Pedro first would really be out of the way, and should CSULB be the ultimate terminus for this line, Metro has to make as little detours as possible.
To me, extending the trolley, on the other hand, from San Pedro to Long Beach would not only be logistically easier, with less infrastructure required, but WAY cheaper.
|
|
|
Post by andert on May 1, 2014 18:46:19 GMT -8
I think that makes a lot of sense. Maybe that will be an alternative they look at in the study.
|
|
|
Post by andert on May 2, 2014 16:17:14 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by gatewaygent on May 2, 2014 17:20:30 GMT -8
Supplement 1 of the 2009 LRTP mentions a Blue Line extension to CSULB (my alma mater), as well as a Green Line extension from Torrance to San Pedro, Long Beach, and the LAC/OC border. They're listed separately, but there is no reason the Torrance to OC border extension couldn't contain the Blue Line to CSULB segment within it. But alas, this is L.A. and piece-meal is the game....
|
|