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. 

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.

One Seat Ride to the Beach or to LAX?

For Westside Subway Extension supporters, this is our dream:

I count myself as the BIGGEST support of a Santa Monica Blvd. subway project, colloquially nicknamed the "Pink Line".

However, only the first three minimum operating segments (extending the Purple Line west from Wilshire/Western to Wilshire/Fairfax, to Century City, to Westwood) of the Westside Subway Extension project are likely to go forward for Federal funding at this time, in no small part because of the money that was already thankfully approved by Measure R for that portion of this project and not the other portions, and because the cost-benefit ratio for the first three minimum operating segments meets current federal guidelines for matching funds.

Alternatives 4 and 5 have the West Hollywood subway spur included. (This chart is also not good news for the City of Santa Monica which wants the full extension of the Purple Line to the beach which is in Alternatives 3 and 5).

Therefore, because of the above chart, this is what will likely be constructed within 10 years if Mayor Villaraigosa's 30-year plan goes through.

Supporters of MOS-5, the segment of the Purple Line west of the V.A. grounds, have little choice but to pursue Federal funding later and keep lobbying for Metro to build the full extension to the beach.

Those of us who support MOS-4, the West Hollywood spur, have a couple of options, if Metro abandons us (even though West Hollywood voted 83% in favor of Measure R, more than any other city).

Option 1) Continue to lobby for the Purple Line spur between Beverly Hills and Hollywood along Santa Monica Blvd. seen above, understanding that we are not part of Measure R funding, and are unlikely to be constructed within the next several years if not a few decades.

Option 2) Lobby for the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment to become part of the northern extension of the Crenshaw Line, which Measure R will see constructed as light-rail between the Expo Line and LAX. The tradeoff would be a one-seat ride to/from LAX instead of a one-seat ride to/from the beach. While the northern extension of the Crenshaw Line to the Hollywood/Highland Red Line station is not funded by Measure R north of the Exposition Line transfer, and as this is a light-rail project rather than the heavy-rail subway extension of the Purple Line, and as it will not all be underground, and therefore likely to be less expensive, it may be more easily funded and built sooner.

Here's a map showing the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment as an alternative to link the Crenshaw Line at Expo/Crenshaw to the Hollywood/Highland station as light rail:

Here is how it would look from a larger perspective:

For many people, the tradeoff of having a one-seat ride from West Hollywood to LAX may be acceptable for not being part of the Westside Subway extension. However, there is no guarantee that the this would be the approved alignment of the northern extension of the Crenshaw light-rail line, which may end up simply going north on La Brea or Fairfax towards Hollywood/Highland instead of via San Vicente then Santa Monica Blvd.

3) Another option comes from the realization that for 30 years Metro is going to be financially focused on Measure R or paying off a federal loan that fast tracks Measure R construction projects. Unfortunately, this means that there might not be ANY funding for am underground Santa Monica Blvd. rail project for at least thirty years.

What if we brought streetcars back to this corridor? Not the historical red cars of yore, but the new modern streetcars such as the ones we see in Portland or in the Cryodon borough of London -- and then run them in transit only lanes?

Here are pics of what a modern streetcar looks like:

Just in case you think the era of the streetcar is over, you should go to LA Streetcar's website.

http://www.lastreetcar.org/

Streetcars are coming back to downtown Los Angeles in a few years and when that happens, demand for the them will grow everywhere.

Here's is my original proposal that runs a modern streetcar from downtown to Sunset Junction on Sunset Blvd., then down Santa Monica Blvd. via the unused right-of-way in the back end of Beverly Hills. A variation of this could have on the western end the route head south on La Cienega and then southwest on Venice to the beach.

To be effective, streetcars on Sunset and Santa Monica Blvd. would probably require eliminating parking and/or a lane of traffic in each direction. I'm totally fine with that, but some motorists and small business owners may object. It may also require adjusting the annual gay pride parade and Sunset Junction street festival by moving them or an agreement to run alternative buses on those days. In fact, as part of a modern streetcar project, we should create transit-only lanes for them to run on, limited to streetcars and buses. In Seattle, buses and rail share the downtown transit tunnel effectively.

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

Of course, we all want to see subway service on Santa Monica Blvd. and see it soon. However, it is not looking good for seeing it within the next 30 years if Metro decides not to pursue federal funding at this time, which according to their own studies is starting to look unlikely. While the City of Santa Monica will get the full advantage and use of the Exposition Light-Rail Line in the meantime until MOS-5 is hopefully eventually built, the City of West Hollywood and the Beverly Center areas may be left with nothing for decades.

Metro has already spent a lot of time and money studying the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment and knows it needs "something". Plus I believe having the largest vote in favor of Measure R has brought West Hollywood some good will from Metro. It must be refreshing for Metro to deal with a community that says, "build here, build here, build here", rather than the NIMBYs who selfishly have been trying to obstructing the Purple Line and Expo Line projects in Hancock Park, Beverly Hills and Cheviot Hills.

So now that you know where we appear to be with a Santa Monica Blvd. rail alignment, which course of action(s) do you think Santa Monica Blvd. rail advocates should we take if Metro doesn't go forward with MOS-4 of the Westside Subway Extension Project for Federal funding as we all hope?

1) Keep lobbying for a heavy-rail subway extension from the Purple Line anyway and hope that somehow the money will come from some unknown source somehow, sometime, somewhere?

2) Begin strongly lobbying for the northern extension of the light-rail Crenshaw Line towards Hollywood to run along San Vicente, then Santa Monica Blvd, still not knowing where the funding will come from and knowing it is not certain that this would be the alignment of this extension, but knowing it will require less funding as a light-rail project than as a heavy-rail subway?

3) Lobby for modern streetcars to run down Santa Monica Blvd. in transit-only lanes, trading ultimate hope of eventual grade separated rail in decades for at-grade rail within years?

Keep in mind, I really want a subway running on Santa Monica Blvd., so I support the Westside subway extension. I just want to give you a realistic picture of where we stand at the moment at least on paper.

Your thoughts?