LOS ANGELES | Transportation News & Discussion

[C.Lan]

I don't think this got posted elsewhere in the forum...news from LA Times on Crenshaw:

Editorial
Mark Ridley-Thomas' proposal for the Crenshaw/LAX transit corridor means well but is ill-conceived.
April 28, 2011

Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas wants the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to upgrade the planned Crenshaw/LAX transit corridor in South Los Angeles, moving more of the light-rail line underground and adding a station closer to Leimert Park Village. It's hard to make the financial case for the extra tunneling, but it makes sense to put a station closer to the heart of Leimert Park.

The Crenshaw/LAX project would run southwest from the Expo Line at Crenshaw Boulevard, meeting the Green Line near Los Angeles International Airport. The current plan calls for just one segment along Crenshaw to be at street level: from 48th Street south to 59th Street. Ridley-Thomas and his allies argue that running trains down the middle of the street would pose a safety threat to area schools and would be an impediment to economic development along the route. They want to add an estimated $219 million to the project to put the entire route along Crenshaw underground.

The same arguments are raised wherever a light-rail line is planned, and they don't hold water. There are far less expensive ways to protect pedestrians, and the MTA's record shows that it knows how to operate light-rail lines near schools safely. And although the line could make it harder for cars and pedestrians to cross that part of Crenshaw, it will also make businesses there more accessible to transit users in the rest of Los Angeles, helping them attract significantly more customers.

The potential boon to the local economy argues in favor of putting a station closer to Leimert Park Village, a historic center of African American life in Los Angeles. The MTA's plan calls for an underground station near the shopping mall and bus stops at Crenshaw and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, less than half a mile from the center of Leimert Park. Ridley-Thomas wants to build a second underground stop at Vernon Avenue, a little more than half a mile down Crenshaw, for about $120 million.

It's not common for the MTA to build stations that close together, but it's hardly unprecedented. A bigger hurdle is the project's cost. Agency engineers are struggling to bring down the cost of the current design to meet the project's $1.7-billion budget, and they may have to pare or delay numerous projects if the state continues to have trouble issuing bonds to fund its share of the region's transportation projects.

Ridley-Thomas argues that there are plenty of dollars available through Measure R, the sales-tax increment devoted to transportation projects, for both upgrades he's seeking. But if the MTA heads down that path, it should tread carefully. Shifting dollars from other corridors to Crenshaw/LAX would violate the spirit of the ballot measure and the MTA's master plan.

The least expensive approach would be to move the planned station at King closer to Vernon. Ridley-Thomas makes an effective case for an additional station, but he should support it with a credible funding plan that doesn't advance his project at the expense of other communities' needs.

Also, I'm new to the forum. Hi.

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by pesto

WSL: three letters and 2 words: L-A-X, general vicinity. But we don't really want to discuss this again, do we?

You really don't seem to understand the concept of long-term planning.

[202_Cyclist]

Metro's record-setting $4.2-billion budget heavy on L.A. rail projects



Los Angeles Times
5/4/2011

"Los Angeles transportation officials have unveiled the largest budget in the Metropolitan Transit Authority's history, a $4.2-billion plan that reflects the agency's heavy investment in rail projects around the region.

The budget includes money for a slew of rail lines, including the Crenshaw Line in South L.A. that should begin construction next year. The budget has operating funds for the Expo Line, which should open later this year.

There is also money for developing several more rail lines including the so-called "Subway to the Sea" and the "Regional Connector," which would link several existing rail lines through downtown L.A...."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/20...s-heavy-investment-in-la-rail-lines.html

[ardecila]

What's the operating plan after the Regional Connector is built? Will the Gold Line continue to run Pasadena-Eastside? Or will we get Pasadena-Expo trains and Long Beach-Eastside trains?

[bmfarley]

Originally Posted by ardecila

What's the operating plan after the Regional Connector is built? Will the Gold Line continue to run Pasadena-Eastside? Or will we get Pasadena-Expo trains and Long Beach-Eastside trains?

The Regional Connector will Consolidate 3 lines into 2 lines. Pasadena to Long Beach and Expo to East LA.

[Illithid Dude]

I know this is shocking, but at the last Expo Line meeting (or maybe it was just a Metro meeting), it was announced that the shitty-ass contractor for the Expo Line is continuing on being a shitty-ass contractor and is being slow concerning the constriction of the line. Because of this, the Expo Line will have its Substantial Completion date pushed back, from June 15 to something later (obviously). However, the Culver City junction is progressing much smoother, and is on scheduled, if not ahead. It is now optimistic to think that the Expo Line will open this year, and it will probably open in early 2012. Ugh.

[bmfarley]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

I know this is shocking, but at the last Expo Line meeting (or maybe it was just a Metro meeting), it was announced that the shitty-ass contractor for the Expo Line is continuing on being a shitty-ass contractor and is being slow concerning the constriction of the line. Because of this, the Expo Line will have its Substantial Completion date pushed back, from June 15 to something later (obviously). However, the Culver City junction is progressing much smoother, and is on scheduled, if not ahead. It is now optimistic to think that the Expo Line will open this year, and it will probably open in early 2012. Ugh.

Wasn't the original opening suppose to be in Summer 2010?

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

I know this is shocking, but at the last Expo Line meeting (or maybe it was just a Metro meeting), it was announced that the shitty-ass contractor for the Expo Line is continuing on being a shitty-ass contractor and is being slow concerning the constriction of the line. Because of this, the Expo Line will have its Substantial Completion date pushed back, from June 15 to something later (obviously). However, the Culver City junction is progressing much smoother, and is on scheduled, if not ahead. It is now optimistic to think that the Expo Line will open this year, and it will probably open in early 2012. Ugh.

Who said "July 2012"? I didn't hear that anywhere. The new substantital completion date is set for August 15, 2011 and with 5 months of testing, we can probably open up the full phase 1 at one shot in February 2012 and not piecemeal with La Cienega in November and Culver City in February. This could actually be a good thing.

Again, where is July 2012 coming from?

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim

Who said "July 2012"? I didn't hear that anywhere. The new substantital completion date is set for August 15, 2011 and with 5 months of testing, we can probably open up the full phase 1 at one shot in February 2012 and not piecemeal with La Cienega in November and Culver City in February. This could actually be a good thing.

Again, where is July 2012 coming from?

Umm, no where? Not I, nor anyone else, said July 2012.

[Illithid Dude]

Anyways, I went to the first Expo Phase II design meeting today. I asked a few question, and got some answers. There WILL be faregates on the elevated stations. I am happy with this, as it adds an air of legitimacy to our Metro system. Sadly, though, the streetlights will not be synced with the Metro train on the street running segment near DT Santa Monica. This is because, and I quote, "We did not want to make cars wait too long as the trains passed through". Sigh. Some things never change in Los Angeles, I guess. I asked them why they didn't grade separate, and they said that the city of Santa Monica wanted the Expo Line to by a catalyst in the redevelopment of Colorado. Fair enough, I guess, as by the time Colorado is redeveloped the Expo Line will need to be grade-separated. I guess everyone wins.

[RST500]

Just some suggestions and comment on the new and planned metro lines.

The future Crenshaw Line should go north of Wilshire with stops at the Beverly Center, Weho bessically the wrote of the hypophetical pink line and than merge with the Red line ending in Noho. There should be a line going from Union Station or further east into the SGV and throug Echo Park, Silver Lake, and merge with the Red Line in Hollywood and merge with the Crenshaw line to LAX though WEHO to Wilshire and than travel to the beach another posibility would be to have a line from Noho to the beach using the same wroute.

Also both planned Goldline extensions leave out the Asian heart of the SGV with one going to Whittier while the other treading along the sparsely populated northern SGV. Maybe they should extend the Red and Purple Lines east to Monterrey Park.

[JDRCRASH]

Originally Posted by RST500

Also both planned Goldline extensions leave out the Asian heart of the SGV with one going to Whittier while the other treading along the sparsely populated northern SGV. Maybe they should extend the Red and Purple Lines east to Monterrey Park.

I think the Red Line should replace the El Monte Busway, extending east of Union Station, past Cal State and the 710. After that, it would jump onto Garvey Ave and run through the densely populated neighborhoods of Monterey Park and South Rosemead. It would then turn on Santa Anita Ave running adjacent to the El Monte Bus station. Finally, it would turn northeast to the El Monte Metrolink station.

Possible station locations:

State St (USC Medical)
Cal State LA
Atlantic
Garfield
New Avenue
Paramount
Rosemead
El Monte Bus station/"Village" development
El Monte Metrolink

The Purple Line should be extended to Whittier under Whittier Blvd.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

I completely agree! Leaving out the heart of the Chinese community would be a shame, especially when it comes to food options in LA.

Many people in LA think that our Chinese food pales in comparison to NY, which is absolutely totally untrue (I should know!). Monterey Park has amazing places to eat and I lament that if/when I move to DTLA, it'll be harder for me to access really good Chinese food on transit. The #770 isn't good enough.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by BrighamYen

I completely agree! Leaving out the heart of the Chinese community would be a shame, especially when it comes to food options in LA.

Many people in LA think that our Chinese food pales in comparison to NY, which is absolutely totally untrue (I should know!). Monterey Park has amazing places to eat and I lament that if/when I move to DTLA, it'll be harder for me to access really good Chinese food on transit. The #770 isn't good enough.

"It is the recommendation of the MTA Route Committee that the Red Line be extended east from downtown along a route that will provide residents of the City of Los Angeles with the greatest access to a wide variety of Chinese restaurants. The Board hearing no objections, the recommendation is unanimously adopted."

"The Board also notes that in no way does the County of Los Angeles have Chinese food that is inferior to that of any other state."

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by Illithid Dude

Anyways, I went to the first Expo Phase II design meeting today. I asked a few question, and got some answers. There WILL be faregates on the elevated stations. I am happy with this, as it adds an air of legitimacy to our Metro system. Sadly, though, the streetlights will not be synced with the Metro train on the street running segment near DT Santa Monica. This is because, and I quote, "We did not want to make cars wait too long as the trains passed through". Sigh. Some things never change in Los Angeles, I guess. I asked them why they didn't grade separate, and they said that the city of Santa Monica wanted the Expo Line to by a catalyst in the redevelopment of Colorado. Fair enough, I guess, as by the time Colorado is redeveloped the Expo Line will need to be grade-separated. I guess everyone wins.

Yeah, the intial planning of the Expo Line had it be grade seperated before Lincoln into downtown Santa Monica via Olympic boulevard. But, the city of Santa Monica went against the LPA and wanted at-grade. I think this is a huge mistake. Ever notice how ridiculously slow the Blue Line is between PCH and Pacific station in Long Beach? That's what i fear with the Expo Line at-grade west of 17th street......

[LAofAnaheim]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

I think the Red Line should replace the El Monte Busway, extending east of Union Station, past Cal State and the 710. After that, it would jump onto Garvey Ave and run through the densely populated neighborhoods of Monterey Park and South Rosemead. It would then turn on Santa Anita Ave running adjacent to the El Monte Bus station. Finally, it would turn northeast to the El Monte Metrolink station.

Possible station locations:

State St (USC Medical)
Cal State LA
Atlantic
Garfield
New Avenue
Paramount
Rosemead
El Monte Bus station/"Village" development
El Monte Metrolink

The Purple Line should be extended to Whittier under Whittier Blvd.

If the Red Line goes east of Union Station, it should either be elevated or at-grade (not street crossing though) because the density in the eastside of downtown LA does not support a subway line outside of Whittier Boulevard.

[edluva]

Originally Posted by pesto

"It is the recommendation of the MTA Route Committee that the Red Line be extended east from downtown along a route that will provide residents of the City of Los Angeles with the greatest access to a wide variety of Chinese restaurants. The Board hearing no objections, the recommendation is unanimously adopted."

"The Board also notes that in no way does the County of Los Angeles have Chinese food that is inferior to that of any other state."

love it

[kalifese]

chinese food is not just in manhattan's chinatown but also in chinese/taiwanese communities throughout queens, brooklyn and the outer suburbs . i'm from ny and we have the best chinese food in the country!!!!

[LosAngelesBeauty]

Originally Posted by kalifese

chinese food is not just in manhattan's chinatown but also in chinese/taiwanese communities throughout queens, brooklyn and the outer suburbs . i'm from ny and we have the best chinese food in the country!!!!

I've been to Queens obviously (many times). But until you come to the SGV in LA, you can't really form a solid opinion on where the best Chinese food is in the US. The variety of Chinese, Taiwanese, Cantonese, etc. here is the best I've tasted anywhere in the US. Obviously if NY had better Chinese food I would have been happier there! LOL

But besides just food, the Chinese immigrant population resides in the Monterey Park area which should be tied to rail transit, which MIGHT actually help spur new development in Chinatown in DTLA. Providing easy access to Chinatown may give the area a boost.

[edluva]

Originally Posted by kalifese

chinese food is not just in manhattan's chinatown but also in chinese/taiwanese communities throughout queens, brooklyn and the outer suburbs . i'm from ny and we have the best chinese food in the country!!!!

i doubt it. you have to see los angeles' san gabriel valley. queens and brooklyn have come a long way but the chinese communities in new york are stlll more proletarian and less diverse than those of los angeles, and the chinese food in new york, while still impressive, reflects that. the chinese communities in los angeles are wealthier, more diverse, and more demanding than any other in the country. it has among others, the largest taiwanese community in the western hemisphere to thank for that.

but we digress.

chinatown is never going to be important for the chinese community. why should they move back just because of better transit? do you think chinese people in monterey park care about the historic relevance of chinatown? or that we have trains that go there? pipe dreams.