LOS ANGELES | Downtown Project Rundown 3.0

[BrandonJXN]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

Ontario far from L.A.?
Um, isn't that what an occasionally quicker alternative to freeways is for?

Though perhaps it depends on which freeway, although the 10 is ALWAYS a mess in rush hour.

But I can see I'm drifting off-topic towards San Gabriel Valley Development, so I'll try to stay on the relevant information regarding Downtown Los Angeles Development.

If you can tell me a quicker way to get from LAX to Ontario then please do.

[RAlossi]

I hate all the talk of a Gold Line extension to Ontario. Do people not realize that there's a METROLINK station nearby? That route could be realigned to serve the terminals for a fraction of the cost of light rail and it would be a much faster ride from Union Station. UGH.

[BrandonJXN]

Originally Posted by RAlossi

I hate all the talk of a Gold Line extension to Ontario. Do people not realize that there's a METROLINK station nearby? That route could be realigned to serve the terminals for a fraction of the cost of light rail and it would be a much faster ride from Union Station. UGH.

Alot of people (believe it or not) have never heard of Metrolink. Let alone it's routes. Some friends of mine have always wondered how I'm able to get to LA as often as I do (I live in Riverside and I don't have a car). When I say I take the Metrolink, they look at me like I'm crazy. 'What is Metrolink' is a favorite response.

Look, Metrolink is a Godsend for those living in the OC, IE, the High Desert, Ventura Counties, and Oceanside. I like Metrolink for it's quick service (From Downtown LA to Union Station is a little over an hour), fare system based on distance, and it's pretty reliable. No one knows that there is a Metrolink stop at Ontario International Airport, California Speedway in Fontana, or Angel Stadium.

Co-sign on the fact that there are numerous other projects other than the Foothill Extension that need more attention.

[Wright Concept]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

Why shouldn't it? An extension to L.A. land-owned Ontario International Airport is physically feasible as well as potential economic source of revenue.

Besides, it would help relieve airport congestion at the already crowded LAX.


Come on guys, don't tell me it's a bunch of or .

There are a number of things that can be done, when a full EIR to Ontario Airport is done one of the things in the EIR is looking at the existing infrastructure. One of the pieces of existing infrastructure is the busy San Bernadino Metrolink line. (I'm not using the Riverside Line since that is owned by Union Pacific Railroad and that line is notrious for delays)

All the Ontario Airport extension needs to build are a double spur track into the Ontario Airport entrance off of the ROW and operate fast service from LA and this becomes a viable route.

Besides the Foothill Gold Line's usefulness ends right at Azusa/Citrus College (maybe as far east as Pomona to connect with Metrolink) any further east is a waste of funds and time.

As much as I agree with many of the priority lists in terms of rail corridors, unfortunately politically if a new source of Countywide funding is involved S.G. Valley will have their hands out ready because they carry a good number of consistent YES votes.

[LAofAnaheim]

JDRCrash......how aware are you of transit projects in LA? Please familiarize yourself with Los Angeles transit and topography. The Gold Line extension, albeit nice to see a rail push, is not an important project. RALossi is completely right, the Metrolink serves the cities better. If Metrolink started regional rail services (instead of current commuter rail status), the SGV would be better served. Heck, Metrolink goes next to the Ontario airport parking lot, but yet there is no stop. I know there is problems w/ Union Pacific & BNSF regarding this area, but hopefully something is worked out so a stop is feasible at Ontario Airport.

And...who in their right mind would take an over hour long train from Union Station (or even up to Pasadena) to Ontario. LAX is easier to get to and closer (and IN THE CITY!). Ontario is 40 miles east of LA! To put it in comparison, the Blue Line from downtown to Long Beach is 50 minutes and that's 22 miles. Imagine, a Gold Line from Pasadena (Sierra Madre) to Ontario Airport would be 30 miles, so that's roughly a 1 hour 10 minute journey??

Please do some research on LA transit, I feel you don't know much about this city's transportation infrastructure or the projects being proposed.

www.mta.net
http://metrorider.elhay.net/
http://thetransitcoalition.us/index.htm
http://transittalk.proboards37.com/index.cgi?
http://streetheatla.blogspot.com/
http://losangelestransportation.blogspot.com/

[LongBeachUrbanist]

Ontario is a fairly remote airport for most of the southland. Light-rail to ONT would cover too much distance at too slow a speed. It would thus be useful only to people within a short ride (say east of Santa Anita). I think it would be a costly "train-to-nowhere".

IMO, Ontario Airport is best served by long-distance rail, AKA commuter rail, AKA Metrolink. One solution would be to extend Metrolink west along that route to Pasadena. Then reposition the station to be more useful to the airport. To me, that would make the most sense, from a ridership and an economic standpoint.

[jlrobe]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

Why shouldn't it? An extension to L.A. land-owned Ontario International Airport is physically feasible as well as potential economic source of revenue.

Besides, it would help relieve airport congestion at the already crowded LAX.
(then again, you do not have it written on your Signature)

Come on guys, don't tell me it's a bunch of or .

The gold line gets how much ridership? Less than the orange BUS way. It is nice on paper, but simply not going to have much impact.

As far as ontario airport, I think it is great to expand it and make it as large as say Sacramento Intl, but let's not kid ourselves. Ontario serves the IE, NOT LA!

SF/Oakland, Laguardia/JFK, Dulles/Reagan, Ohare/Midway are all pairs. These airports are like 10 miles apart. People traveleing to SF, NYC, DC, or Chicago can choose either airport. People traveling to LA cannot choose Ontario. It is like forcing people to fly to San Jose when they really want to go to SF. Actually, adding LA traffic, it is like forcing people to fly into Sacramento to go to SF. That is a joke!

If people used rail to get into downtown from Ontario, it would take them 50 minutes to get there from Ontario over the super slow gold line. People Might as well just use a flyaway buses at that rate. If people wanted to get to the Valley or West side using rail from Ontario, it would take them 1.5 hours, if possible at all. Besides, if they DO go to downtown's union station they will find METROLINK, thus reinventing the wheel. This is a dumb idea by politicians who are being pressured by Westchester residents who don't understand ANYTHING about traffic systems. Forget it! I feel like I am in the twilight zone. This is such an obvious mistake to me. Am I missing something here?

Anyhow, the west side is FAR more valuable than the gold line. The wilshire subway would get 150,000 boardings a day. In fact, our two subways (22 combined miles) would have the same ridership as the entire (3)4 county 140+ mile BART system.

Anyhow, today is a good day for Angelenos.

[jlrobe]

Originally Posted by Echo Park

^There are 6 other lines I can think of off the top of my head that are far more important than Gold Line extension to Ontario.

More like 10.

1) Wilshire subway (purple)
2) Valley to Western Basin Connector (pink) [Orange line to purple line)
3) DT connector
4) Crenshaw line (got to get the lower to lower-middle class mobilized if we want our economy to survive)
5) Hollywood to Culver City connector via la cienega and santa monica blvd
6) Another south central line along Manchester or Slauson (Again. We need better transit in south central)
7) A lincoln busway similar to the orange line from SaMo purple line/expo line to Marina Del Rey
8) Upgrade the orange line into a full light rail.
9) Extension the pink line down the 405 or sepulveda to meet with the green line at the 105
10) extend the green line to the airport, north towards venice (convert busway into light rail).

A few more lines here and there as we need them.

Then MAYBE the ontario light rail line. If ever.

[yeah215]

^ I agree. I actually think valley is a lot denser and more transit dependent than people think. Clearly, in general the land use pattern is more suburban than other parts of LA, but like the rest of the city, it is becoming significantly more dense and is transit starved. That was proven by the success of the Orange Line.

[JDRCRASH]

I apologize if I continue to misinform myself as well as others, but some of these projects i've never even heard of before, let alone them being publicized in the media for attention needed to carry them through the long political process of approvals, depending whether it even MAKES it to the ballot.
Why are voters going to waste time for something they've never heard of before? It doesn't make any sense.
Heck, many people i've spoken to HAVE absoulutely NEVER heard of things such as:

Red Line Extension:Burbank
Crenshaw Corridor
Downtown Connector
Green Line Extension:LAX

While I support the many Bus and light-rail oriented developments, we must put things in reality.
If the SG Valley buses were less than half-full, then we wouldn't have certain neccessities such as the "Silver Streak", which already gets from Claremont/Montclair to Downtown in little time, would we?

[LAofAnaheim]

^ Haha..the Silver Streak. JDRCrash have you seen the ridership on the Silver Streak? A bus line does not make an area dense.

And..about projects you've never heard of...please visit other websites like I mentioned before. The news is everywhere (the MTA had tons of links/maps about their proposals). There's more places to get your news than from heresay on SSP. Here's a few more good sites:

www.angelenic.com
blogdowntown.com
http://la.curbed.com/
www.

[JDRCRASH]

LOL, incorrect, the effects Bus lines has on development has already been proven so much, that it's folly to deny it.
Why would they then waste the money on it if it's ridership is low?
And are those sites all of them?
I've been to the latimes for god's sake.

[JDRCRASH]

I read some of the articles, and the freakin Governor doesn't wan't the High-Speed Rail Project by cutting more than $1 Billion, and if he doesn't want it, were not getting it, at least in the near future.

[BrandonJXN]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

LOL, incorrect, the effects Bus lines has on development has already been proven so much, that it's folly to deny it.
Why would they then waste the money on it if it's ridership is low?
And are those sites all of them?
I've been to the latimes for god's sake.

LMAO!!

So the parade of buses that rumble down Broadway at 70 mph has helped the start of it's resurgence? You don't see The Chapman saying things like 'Granite countertops, wood floors, and steps away from a bus stop.' You see things like 'Granite countertops, wood floors, and with accesss to the Metro Station.'

Think about that.

And if I hadn't seen them earlier this year, I would have never heard of the Silver Streak.

But for a bus, they are cool looking.

[dlbritnot]

I live in Pomona, and yes, the silver streak is very convenient, especially as far as bus lines go. But honestly, I wouldn't concider it at all if I were looking for a place to live. No matter how high a capacity the bus line has, as long as it's a bus, it's not a selling point.

[LAofAnaheim]

JDRCrash...if you are thinking about the effects of bus lines, you must be thinking of the Orange Line. What significant development has occured b/c of the Orange Line? I count 0. The NoHo Arts Wave project and North Hollywood development is strictly due to the Red Line. The Orange Line is another park-n-go as far as the SFV residents are concerned. So, no, a bus, is a bus, is a bus. I didn't consider bus lines when moving into downtown...

[RuFFy]

I think that preparing ourselves for future growth is the smartest thing to do. Clearly, LA put all it's eggs in one basket when it decided to heavily invest in the highway system. Now, I don't oppose the Gold line Foothill extention because I realize the potential for future use, but I also can't deny that it probably would be under utilized. That said, do I think the Foothill extension sould be built? Yes, but not past Pomona because frankly, the IE (or should I say Riverside/San Bernardino Counties) are not, and should not, be served by the LA County MTA. I think the MTA needs to remain in "LA County" and Ontario Airport should be served by high speed rail into Union Station. Keeping it REAL, I find it highly unlikely that people of the SGV will jump at the opportunity to finance a transportation system that doesn't benefit them. Call this a consolation prize or whatever you want, but bending this much for the SGV might allow for 3 or 4 projects on the West Side or in the SFV, or even the Lower Basin. Back to LA/Ontario. LA/Ontario is an excellent alternative to LAX (I can say that as a frequent flier) and 7,000,000 people might agree (and lets not forget UPS' and FedEX's operations out of LA/Ontario). That's nearly a 1/4 of passenger traffic passing through NY's JFK. This is not to compare LA/Ontario to JFK, but to emphasize that the airport is probably used by more people than we think. LA/Ontario is poised to become the regions 2nd major airport (and some people would already consider it that), a look at LAWA's master plan of LA/Ontario gives us a hint as to where LAWA wants Ontario to go. LAX has a limited capacity and LA/Ontario has not only the space to accomodate future growth, it's also not LAX. I think that's what LA/Ontario airports selling point is, it's not LAX. You can park and walk right into the terminal. So yeah, I think most people agree that a regional airport system is the way to go (hense all the examples above of cities with multiple airports). Anyhow, I found this on NBC4's web page that may be of interest to some of you (http://www.knbc.com/technology/14893759/detail.html?rss=la&psp=news). Perhaps the solution we've been looking for that may bring LA/Ontario close to LA is right around the corner.. Who knows. Sorry for my random posts that sometimes are off topic, but I felt compelled to give my opinion that you guys may or may not agree with, but ultimately I look forward to a user friendly, and hopefully inviting and functional system.

[JDRCRASH]

The Silver Streak is the 3rd bus that looks like an Accordian!

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

JDRCrash...if you are thinking about the effects of bus lines, you must be thinking of the Orange Line. What significant development has occured b/c of the Orange Line? I count 0. The NoHo Arts Wave project and North Hollywood development is strictly due to the Red Line. The Orange Line is another park-n-go as far as the SFV residents are concerned. So, no, a bus, is a bus, is a bus. I didn't consider bus lines when moving into downtown...

I could be wrong, but isn't there a new State of the art mall being proposed around there? Or maybe thats the San Fernando Valley.

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by RuFFy

LA/Ontario has not only the space to accomodate future growth, it's also not LAX. I think that's what LA/Ontario airports selling point is, it's not LAX. You can park and walk right into the terminal.

Yes...LA/Ont is not LAX, there's absolutely no significant public transportation serving Ontario. LAX has the Flyaway, Green line shuttle, and many taxis/airport shuttles servicing it. Ontario will be limited unless it gets good public transportation access. It's much easier for LOS ANGELES residents to get to LAX than Ontario. Ontario is best for the Inland Empire.

But, I agree with you on giving the SGV what it needs. I wouldn't mind saying "yes" to the Foothill Gold Line (up to Asuza), as long as Los Angeles gets a couple of projects out of it.