Quote:
Originally Posted by NSMP
The time to the airport is not end-to-end but it’s close, and that will matter to a bunch of people.
|
Scott, I respect your take on all things transit in SoCal so not trying to start an argument... just an open discussion.
Let say Hollywood to LAX is X min via Fairfax and San Vicente adds 5 minutes (I'm spit-balling here...) - does that really mean a bunch of people will now drive in traffic instead to reach LAX? I'm not convinced of that line of reasoning.
If the choice is a consistent X+5 min travel time vs. a variable time of the day dice roll via 101/110/105 or going via surface street/La Cienega Blvd to reach LAX, I think X min and X+5 min doesn't make that much difference in ridership projection to/from 96th St station.
Remember the trade off is potentially more destinations (which also drives ridership).
That being said... I'm actually in favor of Fairfax alignment...
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCalKid
Not only that, it will make a big difference for anyone going from Hollywood to Expo.
|
Same X vs X+5 thought exercise...
Will people riding to/from West LA to Hollywood really choose to not transfer via Crenshaw line at San Vicente because it may potentially take a few more minute to/from Hollywood/Highland vs. Crenshaw line at Fairfax? Because the alternative is to take the 212 or 217 bus (or I guess they can take the 704 and really roll the dice!)
And again, for the record, I favor Fairfax generally. I'm just saying that people shouldn't close their mind to San Vicente until Metro has completed an EIR.
If they dump San Vicente during the alternative analysis phase, we will never find out if the time delay is worth the ridership trade off.