Quote:
Dont forget that the Tri-Cities together are a major office center and are home to many jobs and about 500,000 people. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
My answer is going to be a NO! Beverly Blvd has a sore spot right in the Middle that will be a deteriment for ridership and its success and it's called Hancock Park. Better a streetcar on 3rd Street or another rail corridor down Santa Monica Blvd/Sunset Blvd to hit up Silver Lake, Echo Park and Dodger Stadium would be a stronger boon for the city than a line down Beverly. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Thanks for all the clarifications WC!
I think the future Crenshaw Line should go up San Vicente like the originally proposed Pink Line. Something like this (follow the Orange Line/Crenshaw Line): http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/210...italsubway.jpg |
Quote:
Personally, I'd send it from San Vicente briefly up Fairfax to 3rd St (The Grove), then west to La Cienega where it would turn north to Santa Monica Blvd. But the cost of subway light rail construction beginning at San Vicente & Fairfax might be too much. So sending the line further along San Vicente and then descending underground somewhere in the vicinity of Cedars-Sinai might prove a better option. |
Quote:
This is how I think it should go: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...45276&t=h&z=15 |
Quote:
Not bad, it hits good locations and would have decent ridership. im not sure on the stretch on the 134 all the way to lankershim, but i cant think of a better way right now lol. |
LASF: I'm not sure I see that much motivation to go from, say, Brand to DT Burbank. Is there some natural commute or work connection or shopping connection? I've lived and had family in Glendale for many years and they basically never go to Burbank, and to Pasadena only for occasional walking around Old Town. And this is a very easy drive or good bus service along Colorado.
Connecting them without extending the connection futher seems to be inefficient. Connecting all of them into the "LA grid" via DT or Hollywood makes a lot more sense (especially if the Pink Line is there to connect them to mid-city). This could be a major feeder to the grid. |
Formal legal explanations are excuses not reasons. We should recall that rules can be modified or suspended (and quite regularly are) when political, social or economic conditions require it.
I also hope that your analysis is not right, because if it is you are basically saying that the system motivates every lousy project to get an EIR as quickly as possible so it can jump ahead of needed projects. A truly terrible way to a run an economy. |
Quote:
Connecting to the Orange Line via the Chandler ROW might mean less stations between Lankershim-Burbank Metrolink and Burbank Metrolink-DT Burbank, but it promotes higher speed and efficiency on the Yellow Line. Plus, large gaps like those mentioned above will, IMO, encourage a Gold/Orange link, mainly because they could be very useful for a commute of such massive distance like Chatsworth-Pasadena (or beyond). |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Beautiful pics Westsidelife. Thank you for sharing them.
I love looking at construction photos of transit projects in LA. Each new line brings us closer to being a mature urban city. I still am having some issues with the inconsistency of the naming of the lines. With all the new rail lines coming in the future, I think we are seriously going to run out of colors (since we can't use brown or black or yellow for obviously dumb reasons). I think even the Expo Line having a hard time getting a color designation means that as future lines get built (Crenshaw, etc.), what will they be called? The system dare not have non-color names mixed in with color names! :koko: |
^ Agreed about the issue with using colors to name the rail lines. Even "Aqua" and "Rose" -- the colors likely to be assigned to Expo and Crenshaw, respectively -- sound a bit silly.
I much prefer naming our rail lines after local streets/corridors (i.e. Wilshire, Exposition, Crenshaw, Foothill, Sepulveda, etc.). That is much more interesting. |
I agree about naming the rail lines after the route. It reminds me of London's system.
Or we could go with Mexico City's which I believe has animals and other symbols I believe! Either way, this will need to be addressed sooner rather than later. |
I'm down for letters and numbers.
|
Chicago has a great system of naming their trains................it's after colors. It works for the 3rd largest city in the United States...what's wrong with colors? Atlanta, San Diego and Dallas also do it!
|
Quote:
And WHY isnt the Crenshaw Line getting a DIRECT connection into the terminals at LAX? Why is Metro being so short-sighted again...can you say cutting corners? West Hollywood REALLY wanted the subway - campaigned hard for it, hired a professional lobbyist for it...compare that to all the other f@cking pseudo- westside cities like Cheviot Hills that have been opposing transit. It's sad that their temporary answer is NO. So: someone please tell me before I have to go wade threw 100 unread Curbed comments - has it been decided with finality that the Crenshaw Line north of Wilshire (likely up San Vicente as that was the original streetcar route from a century ago) will definitely be light rail, (as Metro is refusing to build a subway connector station at Robertson for the Purple Line) ? OR is there a chance - however minute - that the "Pink Line" could still turn into heavy rail subway? And how minute is that chance? Not having the efficiency of heavy rail in such large, central, crowded areas of the city = imo, BIG big mistake |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:34 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.