Quote:
Originally Posted by Wright Concept
In so many words yes. With more emphasis on the commercial corridors than residential. Once the main commercial corridors are served by the rail then the residential corridors can follow. But there is still a limit you don't want to have too many branches coming in from every where to serve the line. One,two, maybe three branches ok, any more we'll be talking about
four track corridors.
|
I'm still not exactly sure what you're saying, but I think I have an idea. Let's use the Red/Purple Lines as an example, which serve a major commercial and residential corridor by the name of Wilshire Blvd. Is the segment between Union Station and Wilshire/Vermont the so-called trunk? If so, then I understand how branches can increase headways. But, what I'm talking about is the wait at Wilshire/Vermont for trains to Wilshire/Western and North Hollywood and how the trains come every ten minutes.
Quote:
|
No, I don't think it would mess with it because the headways would be split if an extension of the Green Line were to run to LAX all the Lincoln corridor would do is extend that. ...
|
I don't get what you're saying. Would you care to clarify?
Quote:
|
... By the time Crenshaw Corridor comes online, there maybe a plan to just have the Crenshaw Corridor trains follow the El Segundo/South Bay leg (per the ridership analysis in the Crenshaw Corridor study) and the Green Line would simply run as a LAX/105 freeway/Lincoln Corridor route.
|
Yes, that's what I would love to see. It seems rather inefficient and inconvenient to have to make that transfer onto the Green Line to continue farther south.