"I want to make Metro the first choice in transportation that people think about" - Metro CEO Stephanie Wiggins

At Metro's State of the Agency presentation, new CEO Stephanie Wiggins uttered some powerful words that gave me goosebumps.:

"I want to make Metro the first choice in transportation that people think about. In great cities around the world: London, Paris, New York, D.C., taking mass transit is normal and expected. In those cities, it's just what people do. In those cities, public transportation is their obvious choice. I want Angelenos to think that way."

This is a bold and powerful statement.  It's the vision of Los Angeles public transportation that I have always had -- where it is not seen as merely "welfare mobility for the poor who would surely buy cars if they could", but as a viable, primary, and environmentally sustainable means of transporting oneself everywhere one needs to go.  I want the mobility experience I had living in New York and London, right here in Southern California.  I don't expect everyone to make that choice, of course.  However, it should be an option that is thought of as "normal" and "reasonable" for a world class metropolitan County like Los Angeles.

More power to her.  She has my full support. 

Wiggins also mentions the importance of equity and compassion, and that law enforcement will not the first resort in dealing with homelessness.

I really appreciated her honest admission that the rollout of NextGen last week could have been better,:  "We have learned some tough lessons over the last week."  She promised more accountability, transparency, and clearer communications about fare collection and the NextGen rollout.

Also speaking on the program was incoming Metro Chair, Los Angeles County Supervisor Hilda Solis.

I encourage you to watch the whole program.  Wiggins begins her remarks at minute 34:

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.  

What is Metro's NextGen Bus Study's Regional Service Concept

Metro has set out to design a new bus network that is more relevant, reflective of, and attractive to the residents of LA County, which it has branded as the NextGen Bus Study. This type of overhaul and updating of the bus system happens about every few decades. It's important to keep the bus network relevant and upgraded to represent current demand and travel patters.  Hopefully this will help with increasing Metro bus ridership as a similar redesign recently helped ridership in Austin, Texas.

Metro has completed Phase 1, its "Research and Analysis" phase.  Based on the data collected and a vast amount of outreach, Phase 2 is now presentation of Metro's "Regional Service Concept".  Phase 3, after the approval of the "Regional Service Concept", will be development of the "NextGen Service Plan", expected in early 2020. Phase 4 will be "Implementation" of the plan once approved.

So what is this Regional Service Concept that Metro is proposing to base design of its new service plan?

According to Metro, "Together with your comments, the Regional Service Concept is guiding the NextGen bus service planners as they examine every Metro bus line and bus stop to determine the best system redesign possible."  This phase will defines the goals and objectives of the new bus network, and will include measurements of for success of the new network, route and network design concepts based on public input and data analysis, a framework for balancing the inevitable tradeoffs that this new plan will require, and, of course, Metro’s Equity Platform considerations.

In 2018, the Board adopted Metro Vision 2028 as the agency’s strategic plan. Metro sees the NextGen Bus Study as addressing one of the plan's top goals: "Provide high quality mobility options that enable people to spend less time traveling."

The Concept lists three key factors to developing the new transit network:

1.  Transit Propensity - Identity the areas where the propensity to use transit is the greatest, by examining the market segments of transit customers (transit reliant riders, commuters, and discretionary riders) and the intensity of demand by population and place (prospective ridership generators);
2.  Existing Service Performance -  identify and optimize the most productive segments of the existing bus network which matches current transit demand (what's already working well);
3.  Service Environment - Removing land use barriers to successful service, and implementing transit supportive infrastructure (such as transit-only lanes).

In particular, check out "Attachment E" (pages 151-157) of the Concept for signs of what bus lines Metro scores as performing well in the current network, and what lines it scores as underperforming.

I expect people will be very interested about any proposed changes to their current transit lines, for many people their transit access and reliability can determine their mobility, their economic prosperity, and social/cultural opportunity.

It will be months before we see the new proposed NextGen Service Plan.  While we are waiting, check out the NextGen Bus Study Data Center where Metro has granted access to an amazing ocean of transit data analysis, more than enough to keep any transit fan occupied until the NextGen Service Plan comes out by early 2020.

For a Ridership Data Tool that "allows you to explore monthly ridership stats, line level trends, and historical information for every line in Metro's system," please click here.

For a Trip Density Per Census Tract Map that displays volumes of daily trip origins per census tract, including both transit trips (recorded by TAP data) and overall trips (car, transit, etc.), please click here and zoom in/out.

For a Corridor Segment Performance Map that "displays which segments have the most ridership and are the most productive," please click here and zoom in/out.

For a Frequency Map that "displays how often buses are arriving at stops for segments of each route, with the red lines showing they most frequent segments," please click here and zoom in/out.

For a Trip Length Distribution Map that "displays how far riders typically travel along the corridor based on their starting point, with darker red dots indicating longer trip lengths," please click here and zoom in/out to click on a starting point to display the average length.

For an Origin-Destination Patterns Sliding Map that "displays the pattern of where current transit riders are starting and ending their trips," please click here and zoom in/out and slide back and forth to compare origins versus destinations.

For a Seated Capacity Map that "displays how full, on average, the buses are on segments of each route. The darker the color represents segments of a route where buses are fuller". please click here and zoom in/out..

For a Stop Level Ridership Map that "displays the level of activity at each of Metro’s bus stops, with the red dots representing high activity, with detailed information on the number of boardings, on and off, by simply clicking each dot/stop," please click here and zoom/in out.

For a Transit Propensity Map that "shows you the areas where the propensity to use transit is the greatest," please click here and add the layers of demand data you want while zooming in/out.

Phew!  That is a lot of data.  I cannot wait to see the new proposed service plan.

Please Give Us Shade... (No, Really.)

Last night I was waiting for a bus at Wilshire Blvd. and 26th Street at a major bus stop that serves local and rapid buses, and here is what I saw:

Notice something interesting?  Here is another view.

People are not sitting in the hot sun in the pretty, artistic seating.  They are standing in the shadows of poles and trees.  This is how too many people wait for the bus in Southern California.  If you are a big and tall guy like me, the pole may not be big enough.

My question is. why isn't there a bus shelter?  Why isn't there shade?  It makes for a very uncomfortable wait.  When it rains, and we know from this year that it actually does rain in Southern California, we basically get wet.

Here is an example of a London bus shelter design  I love -- that has shade, seating, a map, a digital screen, and is ADA compliant -- that I would like to see all through Southern California.

Isn't this pretty?  Why don't we have adequate bus shelters throughout much of Southern California?   Don't blame Metro for this.  The quality (or lack thereof) of bus shelters and bus stops is largely the responsibility of  the cities in which they are located.

Also, are bus stops designed based on how aesthetically pleasing they look or for the benefit of the transit user?  Ideally both, but functionality is essential.

By pointing out this stop, I am not ragging on the transit-supportive city of Santa Monica here, or its terrific Big Blue Bus system.  This one stop is just an indicator of a county-wide deficiency.  I should also add that my city of West Hollywood is currently upgrading its bus stops and shelters, which is terrific.  But, if you don't have adequate bus stop shade where you live, work, and play, then go to your city's Transportation Commission meeting, or even its City Council meeting, and insist on quality bus shelters that offer real shade from the sun and rain during public comment. 

As I stated in my last blog, there are two basic views of public transit and its components that I run across:

(A)  "Public transit is method of moving masses of people of all classes and demographics conveniently from place to place, increasing mobility, cultural opportunity, and economic prosperity, while helping the environment and quality of life for all by providing an reliable alternative for people who would otherwise exacerbate traffic problems by driving more cars on our already clogged roads."

(B)  "Public transit is a form of "transportation welfare" meant to provide a subsistence level of mobility to poor people who would, of course, get their own automobile as soon as they have the means and opportunity."

Too many people think of transit in Southern California solely as (B) and therefore don't see the problem here.  If you only think of transit as just transportation welfare for poor people who would rather be driving a car, then you probably don't care about investing in or improving the system, or the experience of the transit rider. 

Having lived in New York, and other Metropolitan cities, I envision transit as (A), and that is why I seek to improve it for everyone in the Southern California region, because I see everyone as a potential user.  I absolutely reject the limited, outdated idea that "this is Southern California and we have a car culture, so mass transit will never work here."  Millions of people already use the system we have and voters passed Measures R (2008) and M (2016) to improve and expand our system.

One person has told me dismissively, "if we build transit shelters, the homeless will simply camp out in them".  Not if we adequately address the issue of homelessness, which is a whole other blog topic.  I also reject the idea that the severe issue of homelessness in Southern California should limit or be dumped on our transit system and its components.  Let's solve BOTH issues.

I don't write this blog post to complain.  I truly believe in mass transit as a public good, and a public good right here in Southern California.  If there is an amazing bus shelter in London, we here deserve no less.  If there is any amazing transit feature (signage, maps, technology) in any other city around the world, Los Angeles County deserves it too.  This a world class metropolitan capital of culture and commerce and we should have a transit system that is top of the line, and in the front of innovation -- not as an afterthought because, of course, we'd all rather be driving an automobile.  Let's have a world class transit system for everyone worthy of a City and County of Angels.

In order to have the robust, user-friendly rail and bus transit system we all want, please give sunny (and sometimes rainy) Southern California adequate shade at all its transit stops.

-----

Edited to Add:  Please read this excellent Places Journal essay on "Shade", which explains who in Southern California gets shade (and who doesn't) and why.  Please click here to read.

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.

    

West Hollywood's New Flyer to Advocate for Metrorail

As a current member of the West Hollywood Transportation Commission, I cannot and will not discuss items appearing before the commission in my blog.  However, I was told at last night's meeting that I can share the following with you.

Below are two sides of a draft flyer that West Hollywood will be disseminating to advocate for bringing Metrorail to West Hollywood -- in this case as the connecting link between the Crenshaw/LAX line and the Red Line station at Hollywood/Highland.  The proposed connection with the Purple Line would be a transfer between a proposed SanVicente/Wilshire station and the coming LaCienega/Wilshire Purple Line station.

Fun huh!.

Silliest Question of the Election Season: "Where are we going to park (in Downtown L.A.)"? - Gloria Molina

One candidate made me laugh at loud with a question so utterly ridiculous that I was literally stunned speechless (but not for long).

After complaining about "too much density" in downtown Los Angeles, former Los Angeles Supervisor Gloria Molina asked the question "where are we going to park?"

I am frequently baffled by people who genuinely still expect a 1970's Southern California style low-density, low-traffic, car culture transportation experience in 2015 in the middle of popular urban neighborhoods, as opposed to in the genuinely low-density suburbs.  But for any politician who's been in office for as long as former Supervisor Molina to imply that Downtown has "too much density" in hope of extending her political career just a little longer is among the worst form of NIMBY-ism I've seen in awhile.

Here is a hint to Ms. Molina and anyone else who may be upset about "too much" density in downtown Los Angeles.  Downtown is where density is SUPPOSED to go.

The Red and Purple heavy rail subway lines are there.  The Blue and Gold and Expo light-rail lines are there.  The regional connector is being build there.  Union Station and Amtrak and Metrolink is also there, along with the DASH bus system and buses from every transit authority in the County.  Even modern streetcars are coming back there soon.  Every major metropolitan city in the world has a vibrant downtown area with lots of density and lots of transportation options in addition to driving an automobile and parking a car.

So let me answer the question for the former Supervisor with sincerity rather than being snarky -- for it is entirely possible that someone who is still caught in the old car culture mindset is genuinely baffled about how to respond to the changes taking place to Southern California transportation to make it multi-modal as every other world metropolis.

The answer to "where do I park?" in Downtown Los Angeles is as follows:

• You leave your car at a Metrorail or Metrolink train station, or an express bus park and ride and commute into downtown.
• You leave the car at home and hop on a bus heading downtown with millions of others, or grab a Taxi or Uber or Lyft.
• You use a mode of "active transportation" and hop on a bicycle and walk part of the way.
• You use one of the downtown parking lots with expensive parking rates because the law of supply and demand rations those limited spaces according the laws of capitalism.

To find out more about Metrorail and Metro buses, click here.

To find out more about Metrolink Commuter Rail, click here.

To find out more about Los Angeles Department of Transportation Commuters Buses and Dash circulator buses, click here.

Your local transit authority probably also has an express bus going to/from Downtown.

Is this really so hard?  Downtown Los Angeles is NOT a suburb.

Some thoughts on the West Hollywood City Council Election and where we go from here

First, let me say I love living, working and playing in West Hollywood.

I correctly predicted the top five candidates, but had no clue about the order of finish, but believed Mayor John D'Amico would be the top vote getter and he was.  Here are the totals at present.  There are still 700 provisional ballots to count, and with less than one hundred votes separating the second, third and fourth place candidates it is still conceivable, though I am not sure how likely, the outcome could change. So these numbers are not final, but this is probably but not definitely the order of finish, which we should definitely know by Monday (incumbents are starred, top three are elected):

John D'Amico*               1,892
Lauren Meister               1,750
Lindsey Horvath             1,692
John Heilman*                  1,664
Joseph Guardarrama          1,525
Larry Block                          826
James Duke Mason              307
Matthew Ralston                  283
Christopher T. Landavazo    276
Tristan Schukraft                  224
Brian Funnagan                     79
John Allendorfer                    73

I heartily congratulate Mayor John D'Amico on his re-election to the City Council, and to likely City Councilmembers-elect Lauren Meister and Lindsey Horvath.

No matter how any of us voted, we should all thank John Heilman for 30 years of devoted service to West Hollywood.  That's 30 years of dedication to the city we love.

A word to Joe Guardarrama.  You came so agonizingly close.  I hope you will consider running in the special election in June to replace Jeffrey Prang.   But please do not go away.  West Hollywood needs you.

A word to James Duke Mason.  Most great politicians did not win their first campaigns.  Your heart is clearly in the right place, so here is a tip.  Every candidate in the race was a progressive champion.  Just running as a progressive wasn't enough to distinguish you in a progressive city like West Hollywood.  Local elections in general are about land use planning, economic development, social services, public safety, transportation, and quality of life issues.  You have a future, and I am sure you learned a lot in this race, so do not be discouraged.

I thank ALL of the candidates who ran no matter how many votes they received.  Most candidates who run for office do not win, and politics is a experience of disappointment and heartache more often than not.  Whether we agree with the platforms of any or all of these candidates, they all deserve our thanks for putting themselves forward to take the slings and arrows.  Every city should have the caliber of candidates we have for West Hollywood City Council.

Clearly from the results in thus far, many voters of West Hollywood are concerned about what they fear are too large developments, and they fear the changes brought by increasing density, and want to ensure West Hollywood keeps its unique character.

However, here is what will not change in West Hollywood no matter whom is elected when the final numbers are released: Increasing traffic and density.  That's correct.  I said it out loud.  Anyone who thought they were voting for any particular candiate because they could bring back a low-density, low-traffic, suburbanesqe experience in West Hollywood was only living in the past and hiding from an inevitable future, not just for West Hollywood, but for its environs.  Sorry to break the news to you.  Well, I'm not so sorry actually, because I don't ever want to go through another West Hollywood election where it appears as if traffic and parking are our only transportation concerns.

I compare West Hollywood in Los Angeles County to Luxembourg in the European Union.  West Hollywood is an extremely desirable part of it, but has very little actual control over the politics and economic forces determining the whole of it, and must ride the wave of whatever it happening.  Increasing density and traffic is happening throughout Los Angeles, especially in Hollywood and mid-City and "Manhattanization" will continue. (Disclaimer:  I lived in New York for several years and there are very desirable parts of Manhattan.  There is a reason why so many people want to live there, so do not fret.)

It is my contention that the golden era of the single-occupancy automobile in California, where we all drive cars on clear, low-traffic roads, and treat people who ride public transit as the marginalized poor who can be ignored, and dismiss cyclists as freaks who should be avoided, is over.  In fact, West Hollywood already knows that to be true, and voted 84% for Measure R in 2008, more than any other city in Los Angeles County, because it wants transportation alternatives to simply sitting in their car in heavy traffic.  There will still be millions of cars in Southern California, but it will be multi-modal, like every other major metropolitan region in the world.

So now is the time for all of us, whomever we voted for in this election to come together and find transportation solutions for not just West Hollywood, but all of Southen California that work for the 21st Century.  Here are some policy questions to begin discussing:

• Do we remake "Fountain Speedway" with bicyles lanes and traffic calming so that it serves our residents best?  
• Do we remove curbside parking on Santa Monica Blvd. to create transit lanes that could also be used by a streetcars or light-rail that connects to SilverLake and downtown, and if so, were can we put alternative parking?  
• Do we wait possibly twenty years for a subway to be built here, or, do we take away parking or a traffic lane on Santa Monica Blvd. for an above ground mass transit solution that can be built in within five?  
• How do we reduce the pedestrian accidents that have plagued our city recently?  
• How do we work cooperatively with Beverly Hills, Los Angeles City and County, the neighborhood councils of Los Angeles, and other entities to solve those problems and create opportunities that benefit all of us?  

This blog will continue to explore those questions that were not even discussed in this election.

On a personal note, like many, I started as a angry young man in politics and policy.  But, as I have grown older and matured, I have grown into someone who is focused on finding solutions and improving the quality of life for all of us.  If someone wants to keep looking backward at a West Hollywood and a Los Angeles County and Southern California where only cars mattered in transportation, and everyone else was simply marginalized or ignored, then this blog probably isn't for you.  In fact, the future of Southern California probably isn't for you.

But, if you want to find solutions that work for everyone -- motorists, cyclists, transit riders, pedestrians, all peacefully co-existing and mobile -- let us find those solutions, because they future is already upon on us, and West Hollywood, the creative city, will likely be in the forefront of it.

West Hollywood City Election 2015: The truth no one will say about traffic and parking.

Sometimes I feel like I am speaking up for the forgotten people of WeHo. 84% of us voted for Measure R in 2008, more than anywhere else in Los Angeles County. People here want more and better transit and cycling options. Yet nearly all the City Council candidates when they talk about transportation issues, if at all, they talk about making parking easier and cheaper, which will only attract even more cars here, making it even harder to get in and out of WeHo, under streets still designed for the 1970's, not the 21st Century.

Since I am not running for any office, I can be honest and tell some hard truths about traffic and the future that need telling, that yesteryear-looking NIMBYs do not want to hear.

Here is the cold hard reality. Traffic is only going to worsen in WeHo in the future as we are a small island surrounded by Los Angeles, regardless of what West Hollywood plans for itself.  Think of us as like Luxembourg in the European Union.  We are a desirable part of it, but have very little influence over the economics and politics of the whole of it. West Hollywood can make changes to its transportation planning in order to ride the wave of the future, and retool WeHo's streets for the future, with bus lanes, bike lanes, and possibly even streetcars or light-rail, and a subway in the future.  Hey, throw in synchronized lights if you want.

But ANY candidate for City Council promising a return to a 1970's era low-density, low-traffic, suburbanesqe lifestyle for West Hollywood (and this goes for Hollywood, Mid-City and its environs as well) is just being dishonest and/or delusional and/or pandering to voters who only see, "gee it is getting harder to park in Boystown without paying".

Such populism may be politically effective and it may even work for this election cycle.  We will see on Tuesday.  But the reality is that the glory days of personal ownership and operation of a single-occupancy automobile in Southern California are behind us even if WeHo doesn't develop another thing, and we need to think of a transportation vision that includes not only cars, but multi-modes of transportation to/from and within West Hollywood.

In no way am I arguing against trying to preserve WeHo's character by rejecting oversized developments.  That is important.  I am instead advocating an acceptance of what we can and cannot change -- and talking about how we plan for a future that isn't even being discussed this city election.

I've been in a place in my personal and career life where I have not been able to keep up this blog as much as in the past, but I wish I had done more this election to bring public transit, bike lanes and Metrorail front and center into the campaign.  It is utterly disheartening to see candidates talk about traffic and parking as if it is still 1987, and as if the future won't happen.  But the squeaky wheel is what gets the grease, and parking advocates squeaked the loudest.  I wish I had done more, perhaps formed a local organization which could have squeaked a little louder to bring transportation alternatives to the forefront of the election.

In any event, West Hollywood is an amazing city -- beautiful, creative, fun, fiscally healthy -- and I am glad I live here... no matter who wins on Tuesday.

P.S.  Let me again recommend the books "Human Transit" by my friend Jarrett Walker, who also writes a great blog about transportation planning.  I also recommend Don Shoup's "The High Cost of Free Parking".

Has the Big Blue Bus Local #7 been thrown "under the bus"?

Has anyone else noticed a sharp decline in the Local 7 service on the Big Blue Bus since the extended and increased Rapid 7 service to the Wilshire/Western Purple Line station was instituted?

Buses come less frequently and are far more crowded. Yesterday, four #7 buses came at once. One woman stated she had waited an hour for a Local #7 bus.

This is not a criticism of the new Rapid 7 service, which seems very popular. I just wish the Rapid 7 now went all the way to the Wilshire/Vermont station so there could be a one-seat transfer to the Red Line as well.

However, as inconvenient as bus stacking is, to have FOUR buses approach Pico and Beverly around the same time last night tells me that something is off operationally. The Big Blue Bus normally runs a stellar service with clean, on-time buses, so this is not an overall criticism of them.

What is your experience on the Local 7 during the last two weeks?

UPDATE:

Things are getting ugly on the Local 7 Big Blue Bus.

On Friday morning, I was riding the Local 7 to work, stuffed to capacity, when an angry older gentleman started saying very loudly to anyone who would hear:

- "They are treating us like animals making us stand. My rapid stop (Beverly/Pico) has been eliminated and now I am twenty minutes late for work every day. I called the Big Blue Bus and no one can tell me why. We all need to write the Mayor of Santa Monica!"

- Another woman said loudly back to him, "they've written off this corridor."

They both complained about the Rapids getting the longer buses while they were standing.

This Monday morning, the Local 7 was LATE, and stuffed to capacity. People were denied entry because the bus was so full, meaning they'd be even later having to wait for the next one. The same elder gentleman from Friday. who was pressed up against the front of the bus was shouting, "We are taxpayers! We are not animals. We don't have to be treated this way. Write a letter, make a phone call."

Now I am a big fan of the Big Blue Bus and the normally stellar service it offers, but the Big Blue Bus needs to do something. If people can no longer board a bus or get to work on time, that is their bread and butter.

Please put articulated Local 7s and/or just plain more Local 7s on Pico during rush hour.   I do not believe the Rapids are to blame and they are just as crowded as the Locals.

Maybe we should think big about this corridor and consider rush hour bus-only lanes on Pico.

If you would like to contact Big Blue Bus yourself, you may click here.

Articulated Rapid 7 buses debut!

I am happy to report that the Big Blue Bus now has articulated Rapid 7 buses running on Pico, now extended east to Western/Wilshire and the Purple Line subway.  That's just great.  (Why not extend them to Vermont/Wilshire so that Red Line riders from the Valley only need one transfer to/from the Rapid 7 instead of two -- but then I am always asking for more.)

Note:  While I was waiting for my Local #7 Big Blue Bus, I notice that the Rapids were stuffed to capacity.

UPDATE:  Maybe what is REALLY needed for Pico, as I rarely see a Rapid 7 pass a Local 7 because of the traffic through Pico-Robertson are transit-only lanes during rush hour.  Since I am not running for office, I can readily suggest taking away a lane of traffic in each direction so that buses may run faster.  Cars can switch to Olympic or the 10 Freeway (as Venice should have its own transit-only lanes with streetcars running in them).

My Latest Discovery -- nextbus.com

I was standing on the corner of La Cienega & Pico awaiting a bus to West Hollywood when a handsome blonde gentleman named Erik struck up a conversation with me.   He wanted me to know about this website http://nextbus.com/ which by using GPS technology and some mathematical algorithm I couldn't even begin to understand states when the next in-service buses would be arriving around a particular location.

I used the web browser on my smart phone to access the site.  Sure enough, the next buses came exactly when the nextbus.com said it would.  Has everyone else in transitland known about this site and I was just in the dark?  As we know, the buses do not always run on schedule and when waiting it would be good to know when the bus will actually be arriving, especially on days when the weather in less than California sublime.

Try this site yourself and report back to see if it works consistently for you.  If so, the transit riding world should know (if it doesn't already and I was the clueless one left in the dark).

Metro Staff recommends that Line 704 truncation at Alvarado be removed from the recommended program of service cuts.

Take a look at Metro's Staff recommendation on the proposal to truncate the Eastern end of Line 704 at Alvarado instead of Union Station.

http://www.metro.net/board/Items/2011/03_March/20110324RBMItem20.pdf

Inside the document, scroll down to "Attachment A", and look at the Line 2/Line 704 proposal.

It says "Remove from the Program".  I am hoping this means that the proposal for eastern truncation of Line 704 at Alvarado instead of Union Station has been shelved after public comment.

I recommended that Metro study rerouting Line 704 to go into the heart of downtown as the old Limited 304 bus used to do, perhaps even ending up at LA Live.  When I used to work downtown in the 1990s, I would ride the old Limited 304 from downtown after work and it was always standing room only.

It's a shame that Union Station doesn't have "destination" ridership the way that Grand Central Station and Penn Station in New York, or Victoria Station, Charing Cross Station or Liverpool Street Station in New York.  However, this is good news for riders on this corridor. 

City Council Candidate Scott Schmidt responds to our West Hollywood Public Transit Questionnaire

Here is West Hollywood Council Candidate Scott Schmidt's reply to our Public Transit Questionnaire. (We thank him and all the candidates who take time out of their busy schedules to address these issues):

(1) Do you support continuing efforts to bring Metrorail to West Hollywood, and if so, with what alignment?


I was an early and ardent advocate of the West Hollywood line for the subway to the sea and hope we get a chance to re-evaluate it when the second phase of construction comes back. I believe we can be competitive with a Santa Monica extension, but we have to make our case. West Hollywood gave the highest support of any city to Measure R--which is funding the subway--and yet we are getting little in return since the incumbents on the City Council dropped the ball on the Subway.


(2) Do you support extending the proposed Crenshaw/LAX light rail line up San Vicente and then on Santa Monica Blvd. to the Red Line in Hollywood? (Note: This could potentially be a light-rail subway and would provide West Hollywood with a one-seat ride to LAX.)


About a year ago, I discussed this idea with Barbara Yaroslavsky while waiting for a plane to San Francisco, and to both of us, it was a new idea. I’m glad to see it being discussed, as it would link our City with both the Subway to the Sea and LAX. For any sections along Santa Monica Boulevard, I’d want to see it underground (even if it is just cut-and-cover) so as to minimize the impacts on pedestrians, bicyclists and traffic.

(3) As modern streetcars are coming to downtown Los Angeles by 2015, would you support bringing modern streetcars to West Hollywood on Santa Monica Blvd, Sunset Blvd. and/or San Vicente Blvd?

West Hollywood has made major investments in Santa Monica and Sunset Boulevard over the last decade. Unless any project were grade-separated, I would have reservations about the impacts that would have on pedestrians, bicycles and traffic.

(4) Do you support transit-only lanes on Santa Monica Blvd.?

No. There is not enough capacity for the cars on the street as it is.

(5) What are your proposals for improving bus service in West Hollywood, including Metro, DASH and West Hollywood's City Line?

First, I’d ask the City of LA how much it would cost to bring back the DASH West Hollywood line and find a way to write them a check.

Second, I would work with Metro to improve their iPhone application to incorporate the technology of Seattle’s “One Bus Away” app so people can know when the next bus is coming, using real-time data. Not knowing whether waiting for the bus will take longer than walking is a large impediment for shorter trips.

(6) What is your platform for bicycles in West Hollywood?

As a West Hollywood Transportation Commissioner, I worked to forge a compromise that would allow bicyclists to share the sidewalks in parts of the City where bike lanes were not available, provided the operated in a safe and reasonable manner and yielded to pedestrians. I believe that Abbe Land and Lindsey Horvath’s Bicycle Task Force is a cynical political ploy. When I chaired the Transportation Commission and we had three meetings cancelled in the last year for lack of staff or agenda items. Why create a Task Force when you have a Commission but to send out a press release and make 20 political appointments right before the election? Spend the $15,000 the Task Force will cost us on real improvements to make West Hollywood safer for bicyclists instead.

(7) What is your platform for pedestrians in West Hollywood?

I’m an ardent supporter of a pedestrian lifestyle and support efforts to make West Hollywood a place where people can live, work and play. This means supporting a pedestrian orientation and human scale for new developments, and encouraging workforce housing so people can live in West Hollywood and walk to work. Tantamount to any pedestrian platform is pedestrian safety. We’ve seen too many tragic vehicle versus pedestrian accidents in West Hollywood and we need to look at crosswalk signalization not as a liability for the City but as a necessary enhancement along out major boulevards.

(8) Have you read Donald Shoup's, "The High Cost of Free Parking", and what do you think about it?

I have not read the book but am familiar with the hypothesis. Up to 28% of trips that begin and end in West Hollywood are spent looking for affordable parking. However, I have concerns about putting the cart before the horse. We need viable public transit options and strong workforce housing programs before we can move to act on the theory.

(9) How would you pursue additional funding for public transit in West Hollywood?

I would ask Congressman Waxman to add an amendment to any 30/10 enabling legislation that requires a mass transit option to serve West Hollywood. I’d also consider creative funding solutions--such as exploring a DUI abatement zone with a fee-per-cocktail to fund mass transit expansion into West Hollywood.
(10) What else is in your public transit platform that would you like the voters and everyone else who lives, works and plays in West Hollywood to know?


I believe that it is possible to live in Southern California without a car. I know it is possible because I do it.

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

Blogger's Note:  I really appreciate this. 

I believe that it is possible to live in Southern California without a car. I know it is possible because I do it.

Thank you, Scott.  :)

Why I am voting to re-elect Abbe Land and am not voting for Steve Martin

When considering how to vote in an election, we all have the issues that matter most to us. As you know since you are reading my blog, my pet issue in local government is public transit. It is vital to me that candidates for elective office have a clear understanding of both the needs and opportunities for public transporation in West Hollywood and the rest of Los Angeles County and the whole state of California.

When I put sent my public transit questionnaire to all of the candidates for West Hollywood City Council, I did not know what if any response I would get.

A couple of candidates stated they would get back to me who never did. One candidate, Matt Gonzaga, who I introduced myself to live and in person told me he'd leave "public transit issues to someone else" wanting to focus solely on the needs of renters in his campaign. (If he doesn't think that "renters" in West Hollywood have needs with public transit than he really doesn't understand the issues of either, does he?) It's the lack of curiousity about this issue I found astonishing (and appalling). Any member of a City Council is going to have to focus on a whole range of issues, from land use, sanitation, libraries, budgeting, social services, not to mention transportation.

However, I certainly understand having a passion for a particular issue and politics needs advocates. I recommend instead of running for City Council, Mr. Gonzaga might better use his interests to form a West Hollywood equivalent to Santa Monica Renters Rights which has tremendous power and influence there.
Of the top candidates, Councilwoman Abbe Land answered my questionnaire with thoughtfulness and with a thorough understanding of the issues involved which you can read here.

As a contrast, in an clueless rant in WeHo News, former City Councilman Steve Martin says the following about the decision not to include the proposed Metrorail subway through West Hollywood as part of the current Westside Subway Extension project:

"Perhaps we should be grateful."

He further states,

"The city should stop hectoring our residents about automobile use..."

In other words, in his rant, Steve Martin has positioned himself as the anti-subway candidate. I guess we cannot expect his support in extending a light-rail subway through West Hollywood as is now being discussed in transit planning circles. Someone should let Mr. Martin know that 86% of West Hollywood voted yes on Measure R in no small hope to bring Metrorail to West Hollywood.

However, Mr. Martin's anti-subway rant is very shortsighted. He seems to believe that West Hollywood can plan transportation and development in a vaccum. Even if West Hollywood adpots a strict, zero-development policy, the surrounding areas of Los Angeles will not, and traffic will only continue to worsen in the years ahead no matter what West Hollywood does within its borders, reducing the ability of people to drive single-occupancy automobiles to and around West Hollywood and, without viable transit alternatives, live/work/play here.

Therefore, we cannot afford to have ANY member of the City Council who does not 100% support bringing Metrorail to West Hollywood. Mr. Martin's proposed "shuttle bus" to Wilshire or Hollywood Blvds. doesn't cut it.

Meanwhile, Councilwoman Land still sees the importance of seeking to bring Metrorail to West Hollywood perhaps through another alignment. There is much discussion now of extending the Crenshaw/LAX light-rail line north to Hollywood via West Hollywood, giving WeHo a one-seat ride to/from LAX.

Read Abbe Land's answer to my questionnaire and then read Steve Martin's anti-subway rant in the WeHo News and you'll see the difference between one candidate who gets and understands the needs and opportunities for public transit in West Hollywood and one who clearly doesn't and is even disdainful to our issues.

And just compare their tone when discussing transit issues:

Martin:

"If it is so important for all of us to live close to where we work or take public transportation than maybe Lindsay Horvath should move to Venice or take the bus to work." (As if it is an insult to take the bus.)

Land:

I believe we must find alternative transit options for people, not only because it is one of the best things we can do for our environment, but also that our focus on regional connectivity will enhance the quality of life for all who live, work and play in our region.

And that is why next Tuesday, I will be enthusiastically casting my vote for Abbe Land and not for Steve Martin.

I wish all the candidates good luck and don't forget to vote on March 8th!

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.

What about the Beverly Hills right-of-way on Santa Monica Blvd.?

Anyone traveling on Santa Monica Blvd. through Beverly Hills notices the unused, Metro-owned right-of-way on the southern side of the street.

It seems a bit of a missed opportunity?

It seems any subway alignment that runs via Santa Monica Blvd. through West Hollywood will head south to the Beverly Center instead of through the low density back end of Beverly Hills.

There are two basic ideas of how to use this right-of-way to increase mobility.

(1) Turn the right-of-way into transit-only lanes. This would take buses off of Santa Monica Blvd. and allow them to move quickly through this area, adding to their appeal.

(2) Turn the right-of-way into a modern streetcar or light-rail route between Century City and West Hollywood that could then be extended east on Santa Monica Blvd. to Hollywood and beyond.

(3) Do both. In Seattle's downtown transit tunnel, both buses and the new light rail share the tunnel.

Yes, this would require redesigning parking structures and redesigning part of Beverly Hills Civic Center, but that could be a great opportunity. However, it would be worth it as a light-rail/streetcar stop at Beverly Hills Civic Center would allow even more people to get to/from Beverly Hills.

I don't believe those homeowners on the north side of Santa Monica Blvd. would mind a light-rail/streetcar on the south side, as it would be more attractive than what is there now, which is nothing.

Perhaps West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Century City, Hollywood and the rest of Los Angeles can work together to create something wonderful for the future on this unused right-of-way.

What do you think?

What about a Fly Away bus in West Hollywood?

Upon landing in LAX on the way back from spending Christmas in Seattle, I was waiting for the Super Shuttle. I asked the Super Shuttle gentleman if he had one going to West Hollywood soon. He said to me, "Of course. Everyone is going to Santa Monica or West Hollywood". I found that interesting.

We already have Fly Away buses to/from LAX and Union Station, Irvine, Van Nuys and Westwood. I wonder if one is viable to/from West Hollywood or nearby?

If you support a northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX light-rail project (a.k.a. "Rose Line") to Hollywood via West Hollywood (San Vicente & Santa Monica Blvds.) as I do, one of the primary benefits to this alignment is a one-seat ride to/from Hollywood, West Hollywood and Beverly Hills and points between to/from LAX.

As the risk of angering Super Shuttle and Prime Time with this suggestion, perhaps Hollywood, West Hollywood and Beverly Hills can investigate creating a Fly Away bus route to/from LAX until that northern extension of the Crenshaw Light Rail is adopted.

Hollywood to West Hollywood to Crenshaw to Long Beach?

I was informed by e-mail that at Metro's Measure R Committee meeting today Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas asked Metro staff to come back next month with some sort of feasibility analysis of a study that begins with the Santa Monica Blvd. transit corridor originating at Hollywood and Highland and continues via Santa Monica Blvd. to San Vicente to the south via Crenshaw with an alignment all the way to Long Beach.

Could this be the start of a coalition to keep alive a Santa Monica Blvd. rail alignment by combining it with a project that would help another underserved area in the south of the county?

If so, this would certainly have my full support. The lines would share tracks on Crenshaw, but that is just fine. In our emerging system, there should be shared tracking in transit corridors that makes transfers and mobility easy and convenient.

I would like to eventually see also an east-west Metrorail alignment that shares tracks on Santa Monica Blvd. between this proposal by Supervisor Ridley-Thomas and one that connects Century to downtown and points east via Santa Monica Blvd., Sunset Junction and Sunset Blvd.

While the ultimate dream for all transit advocates, of course, is a heavy rail subway like the Red and Purple Lines in their preferred transit corridor, most of the future construction of Metro rail will likely be some form of light rail and some modern streetcar.

In any event, the next step for those of us who want to see any type of Metrorail on the Santa Monica Blvd. corridor, heavy-rail, light-rail, or modern streetcar, is to keep the corridor alive for future feasibility studies.

Please attend Metro's meeting on October 28th and submit your comments that you want Metro to keep the Santa Monica Blvd. transit corridor alive for further feasibility studies.

Regular Metro Board Meeting
Metro Board Room
One Gateway Plaza, 3rd Floor
Los Angeles
Thursday, October 28, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.

If you cannot attend the meeting in person, then please send an e-mail customerRelations@metro.net

Look at how far this transit corridor has come in just a few years. Keep up the great work and stay optimistic and motivated. We can and we will ride Metrorail in some form on this corridor within (God willing) all of our lifetimes.

Venice Blvd. Streetcar Proposal

A friend of mine who sits on the Palms Neighborhood Council thinks it would be great having a streetcar connecting the LaCienega station on the coming light-rail Exposition Line to Venice Beach.

Extending that idea eastward to a northern extension of the Measure R approved Crenshaw Line, and imagining a future LRT on Sepulveda and Lincoln, it would look something like this:

When streetcars return to Los Angeles in a few years I am convinced that many areas that will never see heavy-rail subway or above-ground light-rail, will be interested in at-grade modern streetcars such as those currently running in Portland and Seattle.