A Proposal for a New Entertainment Shuttle for Hollywood & West Hollywood

In West Hollywood, pre-pandemic, West Hollywood had two free entertainment shuttles which ran Friday and Saturday nights, the Pick Up Line and the Sunset Trip.  (The Pick Up line also ran on "Sunday fundays" and certain holidays.).

The advantages of a free shuttle service serving nightlife are obvious.  It reduces the amount of traffic in the area, reduces drunk driving, reduces the demands on parking, and provides more customers to businesses in these districts.  These free shuttles ran old trolley cars and played hip music and have a fun atmosphere too them.  You can see their respective routes below:

Eventually, whenever things re-open again at some point in the future, and nightlife returns again, West Hollywood can bring back entertainment shuttle service.  Unfortunately, post-pandemic, there are not funds to operate both shuttles.  The Pick Up Line will return first when things re-open again in the future.  

A proposal I have is to modify the Pick Up route, so the western turn around also serves a part of Sunset Blvd.  This will take people up the hill to part of the western Sunset Strip and provide shuttle service to places like the Roxy, the Whisky-a-Go-Go, the Rainbow Room, and the Viper Room, among others, as seen below;

For future planning, I want to propose something bigger and grander involving both Hollywood and West Hollywood.  A "Super Entertainment Shuttle" if you will.  It would serve the Rainbow District, the Sunset Trip, and currently unserved "Theatre Row", as well as taking people to clubs in Hollywood and the "B Line" ("Red Line") Subway.  I envision both a clockwise and a counterclockwise loop.  Please see below.

Two notes:  (1)  I'm currently envisioning the entertainment shuttle heading north from Sunset to Highland rather than LaBrea, because Hollywood Blvd. is often a standstill between Highland and LaBrea on Friday/Saturday nights;  (2) Also, those numbered blue dots are mileage markers, not proposed stops.  The whole loop is slightly under ten miles.   

Granted, this shuttle would require cooperation between both the Cities of Los Angeles and West Hollywood, and it will be months before all of these types of businesses re-open.  But we plan for the future today.  

Imagine someone taking the Red Line to Hollywood, to then catch the shuttle to see a play on Theatre Row or a set at The Comedy Store; and then heading for a drink at The Rainbow Room, or Mickey's; and then head back to the subway, having left the car at home.

What do you think?

Revisions to Metro's NextGen Bus Plan

Here is the good news.  After community outreach, Metro has made some revisions to its NextGen Bus Plan, and Line 218 has been saved, albeit in truncated form between Ventura Blvd. and Santa Monica Blvd.  Personally, I'd extend it from the Orange Line to Wilshire Blvd. (Purple Line), but I am grateful to see it survive it at all.

To review, the NextGen Bus Plan essentially takes the Rapid and Limited bus lines and combines them with their respective Local bus lines to create a more frequent overall service.  This approach has worked in improving ridership in other regions.  Here are the lines most relevant to West Hollywood:

Rapid 704 and Local 4 are combined into new frequent Line 4

Limited 302 and Locals 2 and 200 are combined to form frequent Line 2.

Rapid 705 is combined with Local 105 into new frequent Line 105.

Limited 312 is combined with Local 212 to create new frequent Line 212.

The change I find most fascinating is the merging of Rapid 780 with Locals 217, 180, and 181 into one new powerhouse frequent Line 180.

"In my opinion, this new frequent Line 180 is really going to need bus lanes on Hollywood Blvd. between La Brea and Vermont to work operationally."  Hollywood Blvd. is being considered for a makeover anyway, so now is the time.  So many bus lines start and finish on Hollywood, coming and going from all directions, that bus lanes on it make practical sense to me.

Here is one for my friends in Malibu.  Line 534 turns into Line 134 and has more frequent service.

I look forward to seeing the NextGen Bus Plan put into operation so that we can enjoy a more frequent service.  I've shown the major plans affecting West Hollywood, but you can see all of the NextGen Plan Updates by clicking here.

How Metro's Proposed Frequent Bus "NextGen Transit First Service Plan" Could Affect West Hollywood

Metro is undergoing a redesign of its bus network called the NextGen Bus Study.  After a series of community meetings, a draft frequency-enhanced "Transit First Service Plan" has been released.

The basic strategy as I understand it is to fold all but three rapid lines into corresponding local service, but increase the stop spacing on these new combined lines to create a core network where "83% of Metro's riders" will be walking distance from a bus that has 5, 7, or 10 minute frequency all day.  This sort of transformation to bus service has proven successful in other regions.

There are tradeoffs to any overhaul of course.  Metro is trading losing speed on individual rapid trips for the gain of frequency of service on many lines.  However, when one includes the time spent waiting for a bus as part of overall travel time, this may be a trade off that balances out for many people.  Check out all of the proposed changes by clicking here.

Here is how West Hollywood is likely to affected by the bus service changes according to the draft:

Santa Monica Blvd:  The Rapid 704 would fold into the a more frequent Local 4, with unproductive stops removed.  (Note: this may end West Hollywood's one-seat ride to Union Station.)

Sunset Blvd:  The Limited 302 would fold into the Local 2, with unproductive stops removed.  At Alvarado, the 2 would run north-south.  (Note: this would create a one-seat ride between UCLA and USC.)

Fairfax Avenue:  The Rapid 780 would be combined with the Local 180 and Local 217, for one new 180 line that runs from Pasadena City College to Hollywood Blvd., and then down Fairfax to the La Cienega "E (Expo) Line" Station.

La Cienega Blvd:   The Rapid 705 would fold into the Local 105, with unproductive stops removed.

San Vicente:  Line 30 would no longer run up San Vicente to West Hollywood, but Line 14 would.

La Brea:  The Limited 312 would be folded into the Local 212, with unproductive stops removed.

Crescent Heights:  Once proposed change I do not agree with is the elimination of Line 218 which currently runs over-the-hill between Laurel Canyon & Ventura Blvd. and Cedar Sinai Hospital via Laurel Canyon, Crescent Heights, Fairfax, and 3rd Street.  Elimination of this service would require new time consuming forced transfers for current Line 218 passengers on both sides of the mountain.  I suggest that Metro try redesigning the service first.  One proposal would cut out the 3rd Street portion, but extend the line north to the Orange Line, and run Line 218 between the Laurel Canyon Orange Line Station and The Grove, and see if feeding to/from the Orange Line improves overall performance.  Another possibility would be to extend the 230 south over the hill to Santa Monica Blvd.  I hope Metro considers these alternatives before scrapping a valuable, direct over-the-hill service entirely.

One thing that will be needed to make this bus network overhaul work:  BUS LANES!  Southern California needs a comprehensive network of color-painted and enforced bus lanes to compliment our (thankfully) growing and expanding Metrorail and Metrolink networks.

There are another series of upcoming community workshops on this frequent "NextGen Transit First Service Plan" all over the County over the next several weeks, including one in West Hollywood, on Wednesday, February 12, 2020, 4 – 7 PM, at Plummer Park, 7377 Santa Monica Blvd., West Hollywood, CA 90046 (Accessible via Metro Lines 4/704; and Weho Cityline).

Click here to find an upcoming community workshop near you.  You may send in your comments and suggestions about this plan to Metro at nextgen@metro.net. 

Why I like the "Hybrid" Option for the Crenshaw Northern Extension Project

As we get closer to Metro selecting a "Locally Preferred Alternative" for the Crenshaw Northern Extension Project, a new round of community meetings is about to take place.  On the menu for discussion will be a new "hybrid" option (seen below).

The more I study the "hybrid" alignment (A2 plus A/A1 above) for the Crenshaw Northern Extension Project the more I like it. At first the geometry of the line threw me, but this option hits all the major job/entertainment/retail generators north of Wilshire.

Going to where people actually want to go is what will make this line the tremendous success it is destined to be.  People don't just travel through this area, they travel TO this area and within this area.

Let's just remember why we need this line.  It intersects so many other Metro lines (Green, Expo, Purple, Red) and major bus corridors (Santa Monica, La Cienega, Fairfax,,etc.) that it will increase ridership on the whole system.  Plus, this extension will vastly increase mobility for disadvantaged communities with direct connections to job and entertainment centers like Cedars-Sinai, Beverly Center, The Grove, and West Hollywood.

There is a minority of people out there that prefer La Brea for this alignment. They look at La Brea on the map, see a "straighter" line, and say, "We want speed, speed, speed!  They don't seem to care about direct access to any of the ridership generators between Wilshire Blvd. and Hollywood Blvd. further west (like Cedar Sinai, the Beverly Center, the Grove, West Hollywood, etc.).  This is why I do not agree with them:

As a daily user of the transit system I think to myself, "If the options are: (A) riding a few more minutes underground to go directly to the location I actually want to go (West Hollywood, Cedar Sinai, Beverly Center, The Grove, etc.), or, (B) getting off the train at La Brea and THEN waiting above ground to transfer to a bus and THEN riding through heavy surface traffic to finally get where I actually want to go, well (B) really does not seem like the "speed" option after all, does it?

I'm sure a nurse riding from Leimert Park to her job at Cedar Sinai would rather take a quick one-seat ride underground rather than ride to Beverly/LaBrea, wait for a bus at LaBrea for however long, and then ride stop and go in heavy traffic to finally get to her job.  When you conceive the whole trip, the notion of the "speediest" option changes.

I say build this line and put the alignment directly stopping where people actually want to go.  And make its northern terminus at the Hollywood Bowl to help relieve nighttime Hollywood Bowl traffic there.

I believe the few extra minutes of curves required to make these stops, which no one will notice or care about underground, will still be MUCH quicker than sitting in heavy surface traffic above ground, and will not at all be a deterrent to its success.

I also reject talk of breaking this project up separately into “two-lines” as there is only going to be one line built in this area for decades.  By the time all of the current Measure R and Measure M projects are finished it will be decades for a second line is even proposed.  So don't be fooled or distracted by those people advocating a  so-called "speed" line on La Brea today while leaving second "access" line to be proposed and built at some vague date decades later (or never).

There are also those who will wonder, "what about the people traveling from the San Fernando Valley to LAX?"  Good question! I think most of them will likely use the coming Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project (seen below), but will still find this hybrid underground alignment MUCH quicker than sitting in surface traffic.

The next round of Metro Community Meetings for this project are soon.

Tuesday, October 22, 2019, 6 – 8 p.m.

Plummer Park, 7377 Santa Monica Blvd. West Hollywood, CA 90046.

Accessible via: West Hollywood Cityline and Metro bus lines 2, 4, 212, and 704.

Thursday, October 24, 2019, 6 - 8 p.m.

Wilshire Crest Elementary School, 5241 W. Olympic Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90036.

Accessible via: Metro bus lines 20, 28, 212, 312, 720 and 728.

Saturday, October 26, 2019, 10 a.m.  – 12 p.m.

Virginia Road Elementary School, 2925 Virginia Road, Los Angeles, CA 90016.

Accessible via: DASH, Metro Bus lines 37, 38, 210, 710 and 740.

Tuesday, October 29, 2019, 6 – 8 p.m.

Rosewood Avenue Elementary School, 503 N. Croft Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90048.

Accessible via: DASH, West Hollywood Cityline and Metro bus lines 10, 14, 105 and 705

I will see you there!  You can also submit your feedback about this line to crenshawnorth@metro.net.

Although I very proudly sit on the City of West Hollywood's Transportation Commission, this blog post is my own opinion.  I am not claiming to speak for the Commission, the City Council, or our hardworking city staff.  

Take WeHo's Cityline's Shortline on Saturday Night

This past Saturday night I was getting ready to head downtown for a night of dancing and frivolity when I remembered the City of West Hollywood's Cityline bus has a new Saturday evening shuttle service called the Shortline, which transports people point-to-point to/from the Red Line Station at the southwest corner of Hollywood and Highland to/from the southeast corner of Santa Monica Blvd. and Crescent Heights.

The shuttle service is free(!) and runs from 7:30 PM to 1:00 AM, every 10-12 minutes.

Why? Crescent Heights?

Take a look at these maps of the free entertainment shuttles for the Pickup Line and Sunset Trip in West Hollywood.

You can transfer between the Shortline and either of these shuttles at Crescent Heights.

The service worked beautifully.  I look forward to this new and easy way to getting to/from the Red Line on Saturday nights.

    

A Look at Metrorail's Crenshaw/LAX Northern Extension Project to West Hollywood and Hollywood

Metro is currently studying extending its coming Crenshaw/LAX light-rail line, which is expected to open year, further north to Mid-City, West Hollywood and Hollywood.  This Northern Extension would provide a mighty north-south rail transit corridor connecting four rail lines (Green, Expo, Red and Purple) -- five if you count the Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project under study.

Following this Feasibility/Alternatives Analysis of five potential alignments for the Northern Extension (seen below), Metro will now preparing an Advanced Alternatives Screening Study to gather public input and further analyze the five alignments to help determine which alternatives will be studied further in a subsequent environmental analysis.

Measure M allocates $2.24 billion to the project, with a groundbreaking date of 2041 and project completion date of 2047. Metro is conducting this study now as there are efforts underway to identify funding to accelerate this schedule.  ALL projects look for additional funding to speed construction.  Please do not be daunted by the currently scheduled completion date.   That can and will be moved up.  This project can certainly be made shovel ready soon.

Metro has been holding a series of community meetings about this project.  I went to the first one and it was exciting to see a room full of people eager and excited for a Metrorail project to be built and built soon.

One of the things I learned is that Metro expects this line when completed to be one of the heaviest used light rail lines in the country, with its connection to five Metro rail lines, LAX, Hollywood, West Hollywood, and major bus corridors.  That sounds like an excellent reason to find the funding to speed up construction, doesn't it?  Perhaps even by the Olympics in 2028.

One of the things mentioned by Metro is that the further west the proposed alignment, the more job centers that are accessed by it.  When I inquired if the alternative analysis had studied nighttime ridership, they mentioned it had not.  We know that this area has a large number of nighttime riders and employment.  Any late night ride on a crowded 4/704 bus will tell you that.  Hopefully, Metro will choose alignment A or B.  C is another meritable choice.   My personal opinion is that LaBrea is too far east and misses too many ridership generators such as The Grove, Cedar Sinai hospital, and the Beverly Center.  Also, based on these numbers in the Feasibility Analysis I would be surprised if the Vermont alignment makes it any farther in the studies for this project.  There is, however, a separate Vermont Corridor project underway.

Metro has one more community meeting scheduled for this phase of the process -- Thursday, March 28, 2019, 6 – 8 p.m. West Hollywood Library, 625 N. San Vicente Blvd. West Hollywood, CA 90069. Accessible via: DASH, West Hollywood Cityline and Metro bus lines 4, 10, 16, 30, 105 and 704. There is limited street parking and a parking lot available.

EDITED TO ADD:  I attended the March 28th meeting and heard the following:  "The Fairfax alignment accesses twice the number of jobs as the La Brea alignment, and the La Cienega / San Vicente alignments have twice the number of that."

Please check out Metro's website for the Crenshaw Northern Extension at metro.net/crenshawnorth and if you cannot attend, please let Metro know by email that you support this project and which alignment you support (hopefully "A/B" or at least "C") at crenshawnorth@metro.net.

Originally published on March 27, 2019
  

West Hollywood Entertainment Shuttle "Party Bus" in the works?

Someone just informed me about a proposed West Hollywood "entertainment shuttle" that would be an effort to reduce traffic congestion and drunk driving.  It would have a party atmosphere.

West Hollywood Patch had the articles:

   City Council Wants More Information Before Approving an Entertainment Shuttle

   West Hollywood 'Entertainment Shuttle' in the Works

Considering how stuffed and crowded Line 4 is at night, I think this is worth exploring.  I'm imagining a double-decker bus with house Music and go-go dancers.

However, if I were designing an evening party shuttle, I'd do something a little different than just a circle around West Hollywood.  

I'd see about partnering with the City of Los Angeles and connect to the Red Line at the Hollywood & Vine Station.  Hollywood & Vine is the historical center of Hollywood and an evening Party Bus that runs there could connect with Theatre Row and the emerging nightclubs east of West Hollywood on Santa Monica Blvd.  

Here is one map with a circulating bus that would run clockwise and counter-clockwise:

Here is the route I prefer.  

It shuttles people back and forth from the Hollywood & Vine station and passes through Theatre Row, goes through the east side of West Hollywood, then up Holloway to the night clubs on the Sunset Strip and then down San Vicente deep into the heart of  "boystown" down to LaCienega/Wilshire.  (Note:  I also think this would make a marvelous streetcar route and northern alignment extension of the Crenshaw/LAX Line.)

Calling for a transit-only lane on Santa Monica Blvd. - Sunset Blvd. between Santa Monica and Union Station

I consider myself the biggest cheerleader of bringing Metrorail to the West Hollywood environs.  And with luck, the northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX light-rail line will be routed to Hollywood via West Hollywood and its neighboring areas.

However, we shouldn't forget surface transit.  Even with Metrorail, major corridors throughout Southern California are also going to need transit-only lanes allowing for speedy service for buses and modern streetcar trams to connect people to the "first/last mile" of the their journey.  We will need a full network of transit-only lanes all over the county (in addition to bicycle lanes).

Here's a sample pic of what this might look like.

As part of this, in addition to the Purple Line expansion as part of the Westside Subway Extension, there is currently a project to bring bus rapid transit to Wilshire Blvd.

I will be the first to stand up and call for a Santa Monica Blvd. transit-only lane between the ocean and Sunset Junction, further heading downtown to Union Station.

As a transit-only lane, it could potentially run modern streetcars quickly and efficiently.  Just imagine...

Now my willingness to take lanes away from cars to allow for more mobility for transit and bicycles may doom any chances I might ever have to get elected to political office in Southern California or it may not.  (No, I am not a candidate for anything.)  But the golden era of cheap gasoline and the single-occupancy automobile in southern California is LONG behind us.  Even if we "drill, baby, drill", $2/gallon gasoline is gone forever.  It's a global market and China and India are not going to stay in the third world so that we can drive our SUVs cheaply across the streets of  Los Angeles.  Therefore, we need to consider practical ways to expand mass transit mobility affordably like any other world class metropolitan region.

So let's bring a transit-only lane to Santa Monica Blvd. while we continue to advocate for Metrorail.

Should the Hollywood bus terminal be at the Highland station or the Vine Station?

Here is something that has confused me.

The suggested northern terminals for any northern extension of the Crenshaw Line and the original Santa Monica Blvd. alignment proposal of the Westside Subway extension has been the Hollywood/Highland station.

This got me thinking about the current bus terminal for the forced transfer between the 212/217 to the 180/181 at Hollywood/Vine.  These buses probably terminate at Vine because there is a designated parking area for buses to wait and for drivers to have their breaks (which is important) near Hollywood/Vine.  (Put aside the question for now about whether there should even be a forced transfer there.)

However, shouldn't for convenience sake the 180/181 go west to Hollywood/Highland to allow for easy transfers to the 156/656?  Is the heavy density area on Hollywood between Highland and Vine really "duplicated" by that short extension?

What is the center of Hollywood anyway?  The "Walk of Fame" intersection at Hollywood/Vine was the cultural heart of Hollywood before the (formerly named Kodak) Theatre was built at Highland.  Shouldn't possibly the Hollywood/Vine station be considered as a possible northern terminal for any rail line ending in Hollywood, also since that is where the bus terminal parking is?  (Granted, at that point it is probably cheaper to somehow move the bus terminal parking near Highland if an expanded station is being built there to accommodate another rail line -- or even include a bus terminal as part of the design of the expanded station.)

This brings up the seemingly unpleasant but necessary discussion of urban and transit planners to fulfill the need for resting buses to park somewhere and for bus operators to have a safe place with appropriate facilities to take their breaks.  So where should an appropriate Hollywood/Highland bus terminal be?

And since we are talking about bus lines on Hollywood, there are actually several bus lines that run or terminate on Hollywood Blvd.  Isn't Hollywood between Highland and Western a natural street for a transit-only lane?  I certainly think so.

What will eventually be the northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX Line to Hollywood?

On the new Expo light-rail line there is a stop at Crenshaw & Expo, which will eventually be a transfer to the proposed Crenshaw/LAX light-rail line.  Most transit advocates in Southern California see the natural northern terminal of the Crenshaw/LAX Line not at the Expo Line where the first operating segment will end, but past Wilshire Blvd. and the Purple Line to the Hollywood/Highland Red Line station.

When Metro finally studies this transit corridor they will have to consider the needs of all the stakeholders in the area.

There will be those people who primarily care about getting the quickest and most direct route between Crenshaw/Expo and the Hollywood/Highland station and they will want La Brea as the alignment obviously.

Then there will be people who live, work, play and want to travel to/from high ridership destinations in between these two points, especially West Hollywood and surrounding destinations, who were disappointed in not being part of the Westside subway extension and whom voted most heavily in favor of Measure R, and their primary concern will be accessing Metrorail at all.

Metro will need to balance the cost of building a longer alignment to provide access to more stakeholders with the desire of those who primarily want speed through this area to create an alignment that serve the most people with the maximum ridership. ALL of the potential alignments through this area would still be quicker than riding a bus through traffic.

Here are the most likely potential alignments of the northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX line as shown in this Metro study map:

Here are my guesses of the most probable potential stops with their accompanying ridership destinations, along with the length of these potential alignments connecting Crenshaw/LAX at the Expo Line station with Hollywood/Highland:

All of these four alignments would have stations at

- Crenshaw and Expo (transfer to Expo Line)

- Crenshaw and Adams

- San Vicente and Pico/Venice

Here is where they differ on the route to the Hollywood / Highland Red Line station

---------------

SAN VICENTE / LA BREA ALIGNMENT (4.2 miles total)

- Wilshire/LaBrea (needs to junction with LaBrea/Wilshire Purple Line station)

- Beverly/LaBrea

- SantaMonica/LaBrea 

- Hollywood/Highland

(This route misses nearly all of the high-ridership generators in this area, and would be sort of like running the Blue Line up Alameda instead of the heart of downtown to Union Station.  You'd get there the quickest, but miss where the riders are actually going in between.)

-------------

SAN VICENTE / FAIRFAX / SUNSET ALIGNMENT (6.0 miles total)

- Wilshire/Fairfax (LACMA/Museum Row - needs to junction with Fairfax/Wilshire Purple Line station

- Beverly/Fairfax (Grove/Farmer's Market/CBS)

- Santa Monica Blvd/Fairfax (West Hollywood east)

- Sunset/Gardner (Sunset Strip access)

- Hollywood/Highland

(As this was the original northern alignment of the Red Line before the NIMBYs thwarted the Purple Line extension through Hancock Park back in the 80's, there would be sweet justice of a Fairfax alignment eventually being built.)

-------------

SAN VICENTE / LA CIENEGA / SUNSET ALIGNMENT (around 7 miles total)

- Wilshire/SanVicente (transfer junction with LaCienega/Wilshire Purple Line station)

- Beverly/LaCienega (Beverly Center / Cedar Sinai)

- SantaMonica/LaCienega (heart of West Hollywood)

- Sunset/Fairfax (Sunset Strip access)

- Hollywood/Highland

-------------

SAN VICENTE/SANTA MONICA BLVD. ALIGNMENT (7.3 miles total)

- Wilshire/SanVicente (transfer junction with LaCienega/Wilshire Purple Line station)

- SanVicente/Beverly (Beverly Center / Cedar Sinai)

- SantaMonica/SanVicente (heart of West Hollywood)

- Santa Monica/Fairfax (West Hollywood east)

- Santa Monica/LaBrea

- Hollywood/Highland

(This alignment has the advantage of the portion north of Wilshire as already having been studied by Metro as part of the Westside subway extension.)

--------------

Why not have two or three separate Metro rail lines some people might ask?  Why not have one line traveling only on LaBrea for speed between Hollywood and LAX and another separate line entirely that integrates West Hollywood and environs for access into the Metrorail system.  Why not indeed?  

Well, to be frank, two or more lines won't happen because of MONEY -- because nearly all of this light-rail line will have be constructed underground.   (Look at the current difficulty in getting the Wilshire Blvd. subway extension and the Regional Connector projects funded and built.) 

If we are lucky and the pieces somehow come together, we will get to have one light-rail subway funded and constructed through this mid-city, mid-west side area.  ONE.  And it is going to need to serve all the stakeholders, or as many stakeholders as possible, in this area, not just those transit riders traveling between Hollywood and the airport quickly, but also those who live, work and play in points between such as the Grove, Beverly Center, Cedar Sinai, West Hollywood, the Sunset Strip, and their environs.

Not just because it is geographically in the middle between the other alignments and in the middle with the lengths of these alignment, I think Metro may end up deciding that Fairfax is the best compromise alignment between ridership destinations and speed through the area, but we will see.  Everyone will have their vocal opinion I am sure.  Hopefully, either the SanVicente/SantaMonica alignment or the SanVicente/Fairfax alignment will be built in our lifetimes.

Metro proposes truncating the Rapid 704 and Local 217 buses. Make your voice heard.

Warninig,

Metro is about to reduce service on the Rapid 704 by terminating the eastern end of the line at Sunset/Alvarado. So you if you were heading downtown on the 704, you would have a forced transfer to the Red Line at Santa Monica/Vermont. Line 2 would be rerouted to go to Union Station instead of the 704, so you'd have to transfer to a local 2 or local 4 to get to Echo Park or further stops downtown.

Here's a thought. Line 304 used to go into the heart of downtown and it used to be packed solid during rush hour. I know this, because I used to ride it. Perhaps the change that needed to be made here was simply switching the 2 and the 704 so that the 704 went into the heart of downtown. (Unfortunately, unlike Penn Station and Grand Central Station in New York and Liverpool Street Station and Charing Cross Station in London, there isn't much "destination" ridership to/from Union Station as it is pretty much used for transfers to/from trains only.

My comment to Metro is that the should simply switch the 2 and 704 routes east of Sunset/Alvarado and try that before truncating the service.

Another bus service truncation you need to know about is Metro's proposal to terminate all northern trips of the 217 at Hollywood/Vine station. This means if you are headed to East Hollywood or Los Feliz, Metro will force you to transfer onto the Local 180/ Rapid 780.

Forced transfers are so discouraging to potential transit riders.

Here are the details of all the proposed service "enhancements". (In bureaucratic language, a service reduction is still called an "enhancement".)

http://www.metro.net/around/service-enhancements/metro-service-enhancements-proposed/

If you have any comment about these proposals, please contact Metro at servicechanges@metro.net

Please send in your comments in and be heard.