Monday, November 15, 2010

Hollywood to West Hollywood to Crenshaw to Long Beach initial Metro review



Metro staff has filed an initial review of the newly discussed possibility of the Hollywood/West Hollywood Transit Corridor being connected to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor approved as part of Measure R.

Please read by clicking this
Metro Crenshaw/LAX LRT extension study
Here are some paragraphs that stood out for me:

"Receive and file this report on the issues, options and costs to conduct an Initial Review of a possible Hollywood/West Hollywood Transit Corridor that would connect the Metro Red Line Hollywood/Highland Station to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station (currently under construction). Such a corridor would have the potential to provide a north/south transit connection with the CrenshawJLAX Transit Corridor, the South Bay Metro Green Line Extension and future potential extensions that could ultimately extend as far south as Long Beach and/or San Pedro."

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

"Previous studies have been conducted as part of the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor for a future extension of that project north from Exposition Boulevard to Wilshire Boulevard. The CrenshawILAX Transit Corridor WilshireILaBrea Light Rail Extension Study (June 2009) identified possible connection points to the Westside Subway at La Brea, Fairfax, La Cienega or San Vicente with future extensions farther north to West Hollywood and Hollywood. Such an extension could operate along the same route as the heavy rail subway alternatives that were considered in the Westside Subway Draft EISIEIR."

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

"Costs to complete an Initial Review of a Hollywood/West Hollywood Transit Corridor connection to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor could be undertaken for approximately $1.5 million and would take approximately 12 months to complete following notice to proceed. Such a study would evaluate conceptual alignments, station locations, connection points with existing and planned transit lines and potential ridership and costs. Since this corridor is currently included in the unfunded, strategic element of the adopted Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), no funding currentlyexists for the completion of this study or the implementation of this project. The South Bay Metro Green Line Extension to Long Beach and/or San Pedro is also included in the Strategic element of the adopted LRTP. Staffing is not available to complete this work. Additional staff would need to be hired to prepare a Statement of Work, procure consultant services and to conduct the Initial Review."

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

If you see the map above, you will still two proposed alignments for the northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX line.

Originally, discussion about the Crenshaw Line heading north was primarily a discussion of how to get this light rail project to Wilshire Blvd. to allow for transfers to the westside extension of the Purple Line. At that time the alternatives were considered to be LaBrea or Crenshaw. As light rail ruled was ruled out for Crenshaw Blvd. north of San Vicente, that made LaBrea/Wilshire seem like the natural extension and transfer point.

However, since those initial studies were made, transit planners and advocates are now thinking that the real northern terminus of the Crenshaw Line ought to be not just Wilshire, but the Hollywood/Highland Red Line station. Also, at the same time, the West Hollywood Transit Corridor was studied as part of the Westside Subway extension project. There is growing realization that a LaBrea alignment for the northern extension of the Crenshaw Line would miss several ridership generators such as The Grove/Farmer's Market, Beverly Center/Cedar-Sinai, City of West Hollywood, etc.

Even though the West Hollywood transit corridor was not included with the heavy rail extension of the westside subway at this time, Metro noted that the West Hollywood transit corridor had high potential and that a light-rail subway might be more competitive for federal funding. The decision to put the LaCienega/Wilshire station on the east side of that intersection means that a transfer to a SanVicente/Wilshire station as northern alignment of the Crenshaw/LAX line that runs up San Vicente to Santa Monica Blvd. would be rather easy to build.

San Vicente used to have rail on it and Santa Monica Blvd. has already been studied as a transit corridor. LaBrea just doesn't have the ridership generators to justify going straight north/south towards Hollywood. To me it is a no-brainer. A Heavy-Rail extension connecting to the Purple Line may not occur for three decades because of the cost. If we could get this alignment above with the Santa Monica Blvd./San Vicente extension of the Crenshaw/LAX as a light-rail subway, we should take it.

The next step is a fully funded study of this corridor by Metro. If you want Metro to continue to officially study this corridor, please send your comments asking them to do so at customerrelations@metro.net

I also recommend contacting Metro's Crenshaw/LAX project team to let them know that you want the Crenshaw/Expo station built in a manner that allows for a further northern extension of the line and that you support the SantaMonica Blvd./SanVicente alignment of that route at diasroderick@metro.net

The tradeoff for a one-seat ride from West Hollywood to the beach will be a one-seat ride from West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Hollywood and their adjacent areas to/from LAX, and as you can see from the map, potentially Long Beach. (On a personal note, connecting the two large gay communities in West Hollywood and Long Beach by train would be great.)

As I said, in my opinion, if we can get this Hollywood-WestHollywood-SanVicente-Crenshaw-LAX-LongBeach line built, we should take it.

Friday, October 22, 2010

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.

Monday, October 18, 2010

Councilmember Bill Rosendahl

I just heard Councilmember Bill Rosendahl speak on legislative advocacy.

I also want to thank him for his tireless advocacy for mass transit.

Thank you, Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky!

I am very pleased that Los Angeles County Supervisor and Metro Board Member Zev Yaroslavsky's newsletter quoted my blog.

http://zev.lacounty.gov/news/transportation/metro-pushes-for-subway-to-va

It has to be said that Supervisor Yaroslavsky's is owed a huge heap of gratitude for steering Measure R and the Westside Subway Extension through the rocky seas of Metro. (Give Assemblymember Mike Feuer his share of gratitude for steering the necessary legislation through our state government.)

So thank you Supervisor Yaroslavsky for your vigorous and tireless work, and everyone else for their work, and even Los Angeles County's voters, for helping to design pass Measure R through seemingly impossible obstacles.

Bravo.

Now let's support Mayor Villaraigosa and MoveLA for their work on the 30/10 plan which will build the Westside Subway Extension and several other transit projects within ten years. Woo hoo!

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

What if the Santa Monica Blvd. transit corridor were light rail?

When Metro issued it's recommendations for the Westside Subway Extension, it sadly did not include the Santa Monica Blvd. spur we were hoping for. In fact, Metro even cut out a future heavy rail (HRT) transfer structure to join the Purple Line at La Cienega. Disappointing news, I know. It is possible that if the Mayor Villaraigosas's 30/10 plan goes through that there might be extra money available down the far road, but that is a LONG shot. Every region of the County will want an "extra" money that shows up from fast tracking Measure R.

On the bright side, and I am by nature an optimist, Metro's staff recommendations did state that West Hollywood had high potential as a transit corridor and stated a light-rail subway might be more viable to qualify for federal funding.

So what would this corridor as light rail look like potentially?

Let us assume that the Santa Monica Blvd. corridor from the Westside Subway extension, "the Pink Line" is planned for light rail (LRT) and looks like this below:


As you can see below the Pink Line and planned Rose Line (Crenshaw/LAX) can be connected very easily via San Vicente. (Both Santa Monica and San Vicente were rail corridors for decades).


The plus side of this option isn't just the one-seat ride from LAX to Beverly Hills, West Hollywood and Hollywood, but the possibility for future light rail expansion as seen below:


Very exciting to me is the possiblity of extending this light rail project each from La Brea & Santa Monica to Sunset Junction and then southeast on Sunset to downtown. Another possibility is extending this south on La Cienega to Venice Blvd. where it could to Venice Beach or LAX.

However, these extensions are all far in the future.

If there is to be any Metrorail on Santa Monica Blvd. or serving West Hollywood at all, be it HRT, LRT or even modern streetcar, we need to begin lobbying to keep this transit corridor alive for further and future consideration.

We may be very disappointed that the Santa Monica Blvd. corridor is not moving forward as part of the Locally Preferred Alternative for the Westside Subway extension at this time, and I certainly am. But don't get discouraged. Look how far this transit corridor has come in consideration and energy in such a short period of time.

Come to the next Metro meeting and/or write your comments to Metro stating that you want the Santa Monica Blvd. transit corridor kept alive for the future. It will benefit not just West Hollywood, but the entire region.

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

What next for Santa Monica Blvd. and West Hollywood after the LPA recommendations for the Westside Subway Extension?

Metro's Planning and Programming Committee released its recommendations for the Westside Subway Extension this morning:

(Although I have admit it is a little eyebrow-raising that this document was released BEFORE the Public comment period was officially over.)


As I expected and as Metro has been hinting at for months, they will go with Alternative 2. This means extending the Purple Line to the V.A. in Westwood through Century City. This means that the full Purple Line extension to West Los Angeles and Santa Monica will not happen at this time. It also means the hoped for heavy rail subway connector through West Hollywood will not happen either, especially as Metro will is cancelling any plans for a heavy rail transfer structure at the La Cienega station:

This structure is not recommended for inclusion in the LPA. The cost of $135 million is not within the available funding reserved through the LRTP for the project. Additionally, the heavy rail option for the West Hollywood Line did not perform as well as anticipated when evaluated against FTA New Starts criteria in the DEIS/DEIR. As such, the high cost of the connection structure is not justified when there may be alternative, less costly, solutions to serve the route through West Hollywood.
While the DEIS/DEIR identifies that the West Hollywood line has very high potential as a transit corridor, further study is needed to determine if a more cost-effective transit alternative such as light rail subway may provide a project that would be more competitive under federal funding criteria. If such an alternative were selected in the future, there would not be the need for a heavy rail connection structure.

So there are really three basic options for those of us who dream of a Santa Monica Blvd. metro rail line.

(1) Since federal funding is out and there will be no transfer station at La Cienega, find the money from somewhere else for a heavy rail subway. Good luck with that. Metro will spend the next thirty years paying off Measure R.

(2) Metro does state that a light-rail subway may be possible. This option would most likely be the Crenshaw-north option, a northern extension of the Crenshaw Line from Crenshaw/Expo up San Vicente to Santa Monica Blvd then over to Santa Monica/LaBrea and then up to Hollywood/Highland. Now there is no designated money for this either, but it would be less expensive to built than a heavy rail spur of the Purple Line.


Another possibilty is a separate light-rail subway project involving Santa Monica and LaCienega Blvds. to Venice Beach or LAX.

(3) This would be the at-grade streetcar option.



The advantage to this is that this could be built within five years with a coordinated effort. It it were put in a transit only lane, it would move very well. Yes, two weekends a year, during the gay pride festival and Sunset Junction street fair, there may have to be substitute buses running, but the benefits to the other 352 days a year a worth it. This could use the back end of Beverly Hills ROW that Metro is sitting on. Would people be prepared to give up a lane of traffic/parking for this? I would, but I suspect some motorists and store owners may object. But who are we designing our transportation network for? People or single-occupancy autos?

NO ONE has been a bigger advocate for a Santa Monica Blvd. rail line than me. Today's recommendations for the LPA are hugely disappointing. But I encourage those others who support a rail project on Santa Monica Blvd. to get behind the less expensive and therefore more feasible options of a light-rail subway or at-grade modern streetcar running in a transit only lane. Personally, I like the light-rail extension of the Crenshaw Line. There would be a one-seat ride from LAX to/from Beverly Hills, Beverly Center, Miracle Mile, West Hollywood and Hollywood. That is no small compensation for not having a one-seat ride to the beach.


However, I am just one person and would like to hear your suggestions about how we should proceed from here forward.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

The Other Side of the President's Visit to Los Angeles - The Forgotten and Marginalized Transit Rider

Last night it took me two and one-half hours to get from Pico/Roxbury to West Hollywood by bus. You see, the President was in town at a million dollar fundraiser.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-la-20100817,0,485361,print.story


While the President was raising money from the rich and powerful, thousands of commuters were faced with no way to get home.


"What a spectacular evening," Obama said. "Let's just hang out."


Yeah. Great. I was “hanging out” at bus stops with nowhere to go. There was no northbound traffic on La Cienega and Fairfax. Buses on Pico were at a standstill. I had to take a crawling bus on Pico to WESTERN, then north on Western to Santa Monica Blvd. Whoops! The buses were not running east on Santa Monica Blvd. past Western either. So I had to catch another bus north on Western to catch a bus on Sunset Blvd., which thankfully was still running.


At each bus stop I waited at there were crowds of people not having any idea the President was in town, let alone how they were to get home.


According to the Los Angeles Times, the Los Angeles Police Department said that the Secret Service had not shared street-closure information with the department. The Secret Service also didn't tell Metro. So in other words, there was no ability to plan for this nightmare and no warning people would have that there would be disruptions to their lives. What about the people that had to get home to their kids?


Now contrast this with the wealthy and powerful at the fundraiser who no doubt had the best in valet parking. Congratulating themselves at their concern for the plight of the hardworking American people, they were no doubt perfectly attended to while the working poor were invisible, irrelevant and inconvenienced.


Isn’t this just a living metaphor for America today? In the greatest recession since the great depression the wealthy and powerful got the attention and priority and congratulations while the working and middle classes were left to fend for themselves with no resources. And the President and local political leadership were, of course, at a FUNDRAISER.


So who is to blame for this?


Didn’t it occur to anyone on the President’s staff that the bad feeling and anger that this commuting nightmare would cause might outweigh all the benefit of “hanging out” at this fundraiser?


Didn’t it occur to the city/county leadership and to Metro to announce the following: “The President is in town during rush hour for a fundraiser, and the Secret Service won’t tell us the routing, so you may not be able to get home that evening.”


Now I lived in Manhattan for several years and when the President came to town there were underground alternatives to getting around while the surface streets were disrupted. My only hope is that the President and Congress approve Metro’s 30/10 Plan, which would pay for construction of the Purple Line extension in 10 years, and that money comes in from somewhere to pay for the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment and the extension of the proposed Crenshaw Line north to Hollywood and a Sepulveda line connecting the San Fernando Valley with the westside and LAX.


But that best case scenario is in the best case ten years from now. In the meantime, how we can ensure that this won’t happen again or that we will at least be informed that we won’t be able to get home the next time this or a future President has a mid-city rush hour fundraiser with the elites?


I have a feeling based on the bad PR coming from the traffic/transit nightmare that this fundraiser caused, that future Presidential fundraisers will be held in lest disruptive locations like someone's Malibu beach home.