L.A. Metro Area Transit: What's Next?

[Wright Concept]

^ Nope, that is what they are working on right now to prepare for the Phase 2 EIR. For the most part the major road block, Cheviot Hills will be supportive of the project so they can study using the entire Right of Way. Also there are existing grade separated structures and wide right-of-way West of the Culver City Station that are intact for this project that will keep the costs down.

[pdxstreetcar]

LA could really use some true express LRT lines and not that crappy Gold line type of express that shaves only a few minutes off the trip.

[LongBeachUrbanist]

As PV said, the right-of-way for Phase II slices through the Westside grid and travels literally as the crow flies to DTSM. IMO, this fact is the biggest selling point for the ROW. It is really something we could only dream of in other areas. In my opinion, the MTA shouldn't even consider (in any serious way) diverting from this path.

Obviously, only the Purple Line will tie the city together like it should be. As many have said, Wilshire Boulevard is the spine of Los Angeles, and without a subway beneath it, we are in a sense a city that hasn't yet lived up to its potential. But I wouldn't discount the need for the Expo Line, either. These two lines are both extremely important pieces of the growing transit network.

[Wright Concept]

Originally Posted by pdxstreetcar

LA could really use some true express LRT lines and not that crappy Gold line type of express that shaves only a few minutes off the trip.

Until we can acquire the extra 25-50' of right of way needed for tracks and platforms or build-in more track switches and siding tracks to make this practical then it's not going to happen in LA anytime soon.

As for the Gold Line's "Express Service" they've recently got the signals coordinated so that shaved 5 minutes off of the running time so that it only takes 29 minutes to make all the stops. Once they get more power on some sections and remove the CPUC restriction for the 210 freeway portions so that trains can go at 65 mph since it is a completely grade searated section; then they can shave an additional 2-4 minutes off the train without building any additional infrastructure. Reliably making trip times comperable to the auto and making ALL stops!

[Alta California]

How much of the speed slowdown is by law stipulating that trains can not exceed a certain limit when travelling through residential neighborhoods like the Gold Line? Tinkering with traffic signals and coordination is a very limited solution until the law changes. I think that during daytime, trains should be able to run quiet faster than they do now through neighborhoods.

[edluva]

Originally Posted by PracticalVisionary

Once they get more power on some sections and remove the CPUC restriction for the 210 freeway portions so that trains can go at 65 mph since it is a completely grade searated section; then they can shave an additional 2-4 minutes off the train without building any additional infrastructure. Reliably making trip times comperable to the auto and making ALL stops!

But this wouldn't shorten the time between old town (memorial park/del mar stations) and union station. Unlike most freeways in LA the 110 downhill is pretty fast most of the time - you can get downtown from arroyo pkwy in 10-15 mins. That segment will benefit a lot from a revitalized dtla retail/residential mix since commuting by auto is still stiff competition.

[Wright Concept]

I said close to not beating the 110. And if the trains came more frequenly that might make a dent. But the key problem comes in arriving Downtown, where the transfer to the Red Line is cumbersome. That is why the Downtown Connector is important for this line, because it would make the times into the heart of Downtown much closer to that of riding the 110 since by Downtown, they're searching for parking spots and mingling with drivers from the 5 and 10 freeways.

[Damien]

I wanted to bring this up here so we could discuss it.

The two things I've been most shaky about on the map were the Sherman Way spur of the Gold line and the whole South LA east-west connector lines (Orange line and Slauson line).



ELIMINATING THE SHERMAN WAY LINE
Now I'd really like to see a line down Sherman Way. It's a wide boulevard, with so much density (its lined with 3 & 4 story apartment buildings with dozens of units in each) and there is so many redevelopment/infill opportunities and potential to add lush landscaping. Plus the major east-west streets to the north and south of Sherman Way have similar are pretty much the same.

But, the reality is the San Fernando Valley busway (a.k.a. the MTA Orange line) which is much further south of Sherman Way is already in operation, it is a big success and as I either learned here or on the Transit Coalition board, one of the conditions of the MTA getting the money from the state to build the line is that it MUST be eventually converted to rail. I'm less concerned about that last part, because I've got to bet some law could be passed to get around that, but nonetheless, I'm looking to add a little bit more credibility to the map, before I start talking to the big dogs about it. Everyone who is anyone looks at the map thinks, "Well what about the just converting the Orange line to rail?" and probably thinks the Sherman Way spur is wasteful. So I'm thinking about:
1) Getting rid of the Sherman Way segment of the Gold line (streetcars, with more frequent stops may be a better fit anyway).
2) Making the Orange line its own line from Burbank Media Center to Warner Center.

The difficulty getting the Orange line from Burbank Airport to North Hollywood station was one of the reasons I liked the Sherman Way spur so much. But with plans already in the making to extend the San Fernando Valley busway to Burbank Airport, might as well.

My thinking is to continue the Orange line east down Chandler (at-grade), north up North Hollywood Way (elevated) and east down the ROW (at-grade) to Burbank Media Center.

Now there likely will be community opposition to the Chandler segment, since it is currently a bike path. But I think two things could help with that:
1) Use a short cut-and-cover tunnel to get from Chandler to North Hollywood Way to contain the noise from the turn. (This incidentally is probably the best if not only way to make that almost "S"-like turn anyway).
2) Preserve the bikeway and construct this part of the line just like the Expo ROW "Transit Corridors" are currently designed:

Now the Gold line Ventura Blvd elevated line, would remain, and the Reseda & Nordhoff spur (connecting CSUN and the Northridge mall to the system) would branch off at Ventura/Reseda. (This has the added benefit of being a corridor already identified as needing north-south connector service by MTA, per the draft Long Range Transportation Plan.

Thoughts?

SOUTH LA EAST-WEST CONNECTOR
It always bothered me that there would be no east-west connector between the Expo and Green line, especially since this is area is completely transit dependent (look at the draft LRTP to see what I mean). And even if we converted the Slauson ROW to light rail that still wouldn't be enough. Florence, Manchester and Century are all surrounded by density and lower-income citizens. My solution as you see from the map is the LAXpress and the Florence line. I partially picked Florence because, its ridership is currently high enough to warrant Rapid service, it better connects with the portion of my Orange line east of the Blue line, but I've always wanted to move the line down to Manchester so it could tie in more South LA residents.

With the Slauson ROW currently being studied by the MTA I think it might be wiser to advocate for a Slauson line and a Manchester line. I'm going to check the density and ridership stats to be sure this is a smart move today. This would allow the Manchester line to pull from everything from Florence to Century, while Slauson line could pull from the Vernon to Florence.

The lines would split from the Firestone/Atlantic station, with the Manchester line going down the Independence Ave ROW to Firestone (which turns into Manchester) to the Aviation Blvd ROW, down the ROW and terminating at an LAX station, while the Slauson line would continue to Salt Lake/Florence then Randolph/Pacific, down the Slauson ROW to Centinela/Florence and assuming the final six stops of the Orange line all the way to Playa Vista.

(Incidentally, I now realize I misnamed a station. Salt Lake/Firestone should actually be Salt Lake/Florence.)

This would not prevent an LAXpress line from using the ROW, but it probably would be wisest if it were light rail as well.

Oh and since I'm going to convert the San Fernando Valley busway to rail and its currently known as the Orange line, I'm going to need to rename my Orange line. Any ideas? When picking the color keep in mind how well it would go over with Councilman Parks.

[Damien]

Oh and I forgot to mention that the map got some great unexpected coverage on CurbedLA and blogging.la, where me and Art held it down against the naysayers!

Anyone wondering how strong the map would be in garnering support in the county for rail expansion should read the comments.

[ocman]

Finally on the right track

Building a subway line along Wilshire Boulevard to the beach, an idea officially revived last week when the House of Representatives voted to repeal a 20-year-old tunneling ban here, is an example of urban planning done backward: Watch as population and job growth push an urban corridor in the direction of Tokyo-like density. Then ram an underground train route right through it. And pay dearly, in dollars and political capital, for the privilege.

The plan remains an exceedingly tough sell. In comparison with the massive cost and disruption that would come with digging new tunnels along Wilshire, above-ground transit projects — the planned Gold Line extension eastward through the San Gabriel Valley, for example, or the Exposition Line through Culver City — will always appear more cost-efficient.


But maybe it's time to redefine exactly what cost-efficiency means in a city such as Los Angeles. If we had managed to get past hidden pockets of methane and pointed NIMBYism and extended the Red Line along Wilshire in the 1990s, after all, it would now look like the biggest bargain in Southern California transit history. Measured over time, the political expediency Los Angeles has always been known for can be awfully expensive in its own right.

And the Wilshire subway — which the MTA renamed the Purple Line last month — promises to do more than ease Westside gridlock and provide a framework for inevitable growth. In a way unique among transit projects being considered, it could trace a new urban blueprint here, recasting the old image of Wilshire as a linear downtown for an age of density and knitting the idea of Los Angeles — the city, not the collection of retail centers and red carpets — back together. It could turn a neon-bright symbol of L.A.'s love affair with the private car into the best-used transit corridor in Southern California: the strip as civic spine.

It would also connect, in the space of a single subway ride, some of the city's most important cultural institutions, quirkiest icons and most recognizable landmarks. From east to west, this appealing jumble includes Skidmore, Owings and Merrill's One Wilshire building downtown; the former Bullock's Wilshire building; the Wiltern LG theater; Langdon Wilson's Superior Court building (just off Wilshire); the Los Angeles County Museum of Art; and UCLA's Hammer Museum. It ends just above the beach at the statue of Saint Monica, standing with her back to the ocean.

Even the proposed first section of the two-part extension, to the corner of Wilshire and Fairfax, would bring LACMA onto the subway grid — a move that could have a dramatic effect on the museum's centrality in the city's cultural and psychic landscape as architect Renzo Piano works to redesign its campus.

From a practical point of view, of course, the extension, which Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has championed since his days on the campaign trail, could hardly be more overdue. The Wilshire corridor cuts directly through what transit planners call the most densely populated urban area in the United States that isn't served by either a subway or light rail. But it would also be staggeringly expensive: roughly $350 million per mile to drag the subway an additional 13 miles along Wilshire to the beach.

As the extension debate has intensified in recent weeks, it has been remarkable to see how spreading gridlock on the Westside has turned some of the Wilshire subway's most stubborn adversaries into cheerleaders for mass transit. The converts include Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles), who sponsored the original tunneling-ban legislation after a 1985 methane explosion in a Ross clothing store before working this summer to reverse it; L.A. County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who pushed an anti-subway ballot measure in 1998 but now supports the Purple Line; and Diana Plotkin, president of the Beverly Wilshire Homes Assn., who told The Times she was "terrified" 20 years ago of a subway running through her neighborhood but now says, "We do need a solution to this horrible traffic problem."

Funding for the project — even the first phase to Fairfax, which could cost more than $1 billion — remains very much in doubt. But Villaraigosa's close ties to Sacramento will help in securing state money, and a pair of infrastructure bond measures on the November ballot, Propositions 1A and 1B, could direct several billion dollars to L.A. County for highway and transit construction.

Some opponents of the subway to the sea complain that it makes little sense for Los Angeles because it borrows an ill-fitting notion of dense urbanity from New York and San Francisco, or because it would threaten L.A.'s neighborhood diversity. But development spurred by stations along Wilshire could help highlight distinctions between neighborhoods rather than erase them.

Indeed, travel by subway can make those differences more pronounced. When you're riding underground, even along a single boulevard, Point A becomes distinct from Point B; sections of the city become discrete locations rather than parts of an asphalt continuum. Transit-oriented development around subway stops can further this sense, though the design of projects on land controlled by the MTA — such as the Hollywood and Highland shopping center or the Archeon Group's proposed $160-million condo tower for the intersection of Wilshire and Western — is hardly encouraging along these lines.

Most of us would rarely if ever take the line for its full route. But it would make all the difference to know that we could. With a subway connection to the beach, after all, residents of El Sereno, Koreatown or downtown could reasonably think of themselves as living in the same city as somebody in Brentwood.

Without it, those neighborhoods threaten to drift off permanently into their own orbits. And we can start thinking of Monica, facing east from the beach along the proposed course of the subway, as the patron saint of blown opportunities.

[LongBeachUrbanist]

My post from Metroblogging:

It's only a matter of time. We probably will never have anything as comprehensive as this, politics will get in the way. But trust me, the politics of gridlocked traffic will result in many many of these lines being built. The Wilshire Subway, once considered a dead issue, is alive again in the public eye, and I'm confident it will be under construction by 2014.

It all comes down to commerce and money, and that will drive it. Remember, NYC didn't build it's subway system out of altruism, it was the profit motive. But trust me, when my fellow Angelenos finally get over the idea that our city is somehow different from all other major world cities, it is the citizens of L.A. who will benefit.

[solongfullerton]

Damien, I really like your map, but everytime i see it i still get confused with the Westside Pavillion stop. I drive by there everyday, and although overland/pico is a major intersection, that mall isnt really much of a destination, especially for the transit riding type. Although its no beverly center, it still caters to the very well to do. anyways, taking that into consideration as well as the fact that housing is not very dense in that area and that the 45 degree turn the train would have to take is nearly impossible, i think the mta would be better just running the tunnel from century city back to wilshire where it could make a stop in condo canyon and westwood village. south of wilshire, westwood has some very dense neighborhoods that would benefit far greater than the rancho park area, which is all single family homes.

[Damien]

Originally Posted by solongfullerton

Damien, I really like your map, but everytime i see it i still get confused with the Westside Pavillion stop. I drive by there everyday, and although overland/pico is a major intersection, that mall isnt really much of a destination, especially for the transit riding type.

The intersection for the Westside Pavilion is actually Pico/Westwood. The 405 line comes from the Valley under the mountains to UCLA and then continues south down Westwood (stations at Wilshire, Santa Monica & Pico) and west down Pico (station at Westside Pavilion & Expo junction at Sepulveda) to the 405. All of that would be underground. It then would come from under the ground to head south down the eastern shoulder of the 405 freeway.

Also, I'm a firm believer in serving major retail centers (i.e. traffic generators), so I'd argue for the station but ultimately it'll be the big money planners and politicians who decide. And while the clientele for the Westside Pavilion might not seem like a transit rider today, I'd hope to get to the day that it is. And there are plenty of people who aren't affluent who frequent the mall or might want to go to the mall and when seeing it on the map will think "Wow. It would be really cool to be able to take the train there."

i think the mta would be better just running the tunnel from century city back to wilshire where it could make a stop in condo canyon and westwood village. south of wilshire, westwood has some very dense neighborhoods that would benefit far greater than the rancho park area, which is all single family homes.

Not quite sure what which line you're referring to. The Westside Pavilion is served by the Bronze/405 line while Century City is served by the Purple/Wilshire line. The Purple line heads southwest from Wilshire/Santa Monica down Santa Monica, north up Westwood to Wilshire and west down Wilshire. The area along Wilshire between Santa Monica Blvd and Westwood blvd is D-E-A-D as far as population density, transit dependency and job density is concerned, while the area along Santa Monica between Wilshire and Westwood has high job density. It's a wise diversion.

[solongfullerton]

I was reading the map w/o my glasses and with all the station names being so small and close together i was misunderstood. anyways, as for the santa monica/westwod stop, you're right about businesses along SMB, but thats still one hell of a turn for the train. maybe a stop at overland in front of the mormon church would be a better idea, with its central location between CC and the 405, which would also make the turn up to UCLA much more gradual. You're bronze line could serve the sepulveda corridor, which isnt even that far from westwood in the first place.

[Damien]

I hear you. Just because the map says it has a station at Santa Monica/Westwood doesn't mean the station opening has to be on that corner. For example, it could be a block east on Santa Monica/Glendon or on the southeast corner of Westwood/Massachusetts. That would be up to the planners to decide, and if they did need to put the station opening a block away, the map would still say Santa Monica/Westwood, because that's an intersection people recognize. Whether riders have to walk 30-60 seconds from the intersection to the station entry is less of a concern than people being able to look at the map and plan their trip. I wouldn't go with Overland though, because there's no bus on Overland, and in this area Westwood is a bit of a commercial and retail strip. But you bring up an excellent point. The turn is about 95 degrees and these are heavy rail vehicles, so its more likely than not that the actual station entries will be a block away from the intersection. But remember there is some flexibility here as the line is completely underground.

Regarding Westwood or Sepulveda, this actually came up when discussing a Bronze/405 line: should the Bronze line turn east to the 405 eastern shoulder after the Wilshire/Westwood stop or after the Westside Pavilion stop? The simple answer is I'd rather have the Westside Pavilion on the map than not. It's a landmark to those not as familiar with the area, and a shopping destination for a lot of people. I also saw it as a bit of a question of who is more likely to walk 0.4 mile: a person with a handful of stuff they just bought from the mall or a person going to work on Sepulveda.

[J Church]

Damien, I saw the Metblogs and Curbed posts and comments. Good show. Keep plugging.

Now this ... this is funny:

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2006/0...line_break.php

[RAlossi]

Hey, has train frequency increased on the Red Line? I was Downtown yesterday and I could swear that there was a dramatic increase in the number. I just missed my NoHo-bound train by seconds, and there was another one probably 7 minutes later.

[DJM19]

that might have been because there were so many things going on downtown, with two music fests and the USC game and Dodger game

[Easy]

I wasn't there so I couldn't say, but in the past they've run longer trains on busy weekends but not more frequent trains. Are you sure that you missed a NoHo train or was it a 6-car Wilshire/Western train? Either way, I'd be really surprised to see 7-minute headways weekends on the North Hollywood line when it only runs at 10-minute headways during rush hour during the week.

[colemonkee]

There were more surveyors along the Expo line this morning. Hopefully we see some real movement soon. The two middle lanes of Expo have been closed to traffic (with the exception of left turn lanes) for over a month now. I'd like to see some more visible construction work, or at least some signage...