Purple Line ... to West Hollywood?

Well, we guess you can never plan far enough ahead. We've been telling you that plans for a Subway to the Sea have taken some hits in recent months (mainly because of the money). But that hasn't stopped a debate from beginning about whether the Wilshire-only route makes sense. LAist has been having a discussion about whether the Purple Line should actually detour through West Hollywood via Santa Monica Boulevard to capture more potential riders. There's even a poll.

Of course, we can only assume that adding the West Hollywood extension would add several billion more dollars to the $6-billion price tag. Do you like this new route?

Comments

[Ken Alpern]

Let's just get the Wilshire subway to Fairfax before we start talking silly diversions and stuff, OK?

I could argue that a Santa Monica Blvd. segment might someday be good for Beverly Hills and West Hollywood to be included in a Red/Purple Line loop, but otherwise the neighboring areas can always have feeder bus lines or DASH buses/vans for those who need them.

An analogy is a freeway vs. a surface street. We need surface streets to feed into the freeways, which means we can't always directly drive from our homes to the freeways. Feeder bus lines and/or parking structures for those of us to access the Purple Line under Wilshire will get the job done.

The closest distance between two points is a straight line, last I heard.

[nicholas]

its amazing how our federal government can find (or borrow!) money for Iraq and Afganistan while we ignore our own nation's disintigrating infastructure. The last Transport bill was a debacle in and of itself. 250 million for a bridge in Alaska that serves a couple hundred people! that was one of a mulititude of porkbarrel projects that do nothing to benefit the country's population or environment!

[Shaun]

Making the Wilshire extenstion elevated light rail instead of continuing it has a heavy rail subway will kill ridership. That will add at least 15 minutes to people's commute. Having a mid-Line terminus is a horrible idea and one of the worst and most inconvenient things you can do in transit. For people to get out of their cars transit needs to be convenient and making transfers, especially to continue your trip along the same route, is extemely inconvenient and will hurt ridership and attract few people out of their cars. LA already made that mistake withe Orange Line which is running at capacity and not nearly as fast as it could have been if it was a red line extension like it should have been. Complete the purple line as it is, a heavy rail subway, and make a spur to connect to the red line in Hollywood.

And USC is getting light rail b/c its next to an existing right of way where the Expo line is being built. It has nothing to do with "pro-trojan" politics but is benefitting from it's location next to where the line is being built.

[Bart Reed]

Sheryl:

I've done a little costing out of the route you've described and the use of elevated structures. With everything costed out, you are looking at $200 million per mile, just about the same as the subway, but with added visual blight and significant blockage of the surface road capacity.

One reason that subway building is so expensive in Los Angeles is the short segments we build. For the three mile extension from Wilshire / Western to Wilshire / Fairfax, which is estimated at about $1 Billion, fully 1/3 of the cost is just setting up the project or about $350 million. Stations run about $125 million each or $375 million to Fairfax. The actual cost of tunneling is somewhere close to or just under $100 million/mile.

So, if you actually set the project up to keep tunneling an additional 10 miles, you are looking at another $1 Billion and then another 9 stations at about $1.125 Billion, so you'd save quite a bit, if you could come up with $3 Billion at one point in time, but spread the construction over say 5 years.

Building massive infrastructure projects in bits and pieces with stops and starts could ad another $3 Billion to the above price, but it doesn't have to be done that way. Also, remember that the lifespan value of this project should be spread over 150 years, so overall the investment is a good value for our city.

[Sheryl]

The Wilshire/Purple Line shouldn't be tunneled anywhere. It would be far, far less expensive to start at Wilshire/Western and build a new elevated light rail down Wilshire. Put in a dozen freight size elevators to move people directly from the underground platform to the elevated platform. It's just not that complicated.

Elevated light rail would be perfectly easy to route north on La Brea--which is substantially wider than Fairfax--to Beverly, then west on Beverly, with one stop at The Grove Drive to service The Grove/Farmer's Market, CBS Studios, Pan Pacific Park and Park La Brea.

Continue west on Beverly Blvd to San Vicente, then turn south on San Vicente and place a stop right between Cedars and the Bev Center. Continue south on San Vicente to Wilshire and use that perfectly HUGE angled intersection to turn back onto Wilshire Blvd.

Take Wilshire thru Beverly Hills, angle down Santa Monica (which is much wider then Wilshire west of the Wilshire/SM intersection) to cover Century City; west on Santa Monica to Westwood; then north on Westwood to UCLA.

There's no point in building a "downtown to the beach" rail line of any kind that doesn't include at LEAST 2 stops on the UCLA campus--one of them at UCLA Medical Center.

(Besides--USC is getting a light rail of their own. What kind of pro-Trojan political crap is THAT,private university USC gets a taxpayer funded rail line, but not the PUBLIC UNIVERSITY?? Not good, not good at all.)

The train can exit UCLA, arc across the405 and make a stop at the VA before returning to Wilshire proper.

THAT'S what the Wilshire/Purple line needs to do. And elevated trains can run at speeds of 60 miles an hour or more.

What Hollywood/WEHO needs is elevated light rail on SUNSET, from downtown to UCLA. In fact, a light rail from Union Station to UCLA Medical Center would be exactly the ticket. Run it 40 feet above the middle of Sunset Blvd all the way, with a small detour just for Dodger Stadium.

[Wright Concept]

"This comes across as a narrow understanding of how the subway has changed and continues to change people's transportation habits. The Red Line is busy throughout the weekday and throughout the week (and surprisingly oftentimes on the weekends) and serves office workers downtown, the working class, tourists and everyone else"

Right and most of those things occured from the onset of the opening of the Subway. Opening day ridership to N.Hollywood was at 120,000 riders now it's at 140,000 riders and climbing. Washington DC with it's Metro has done the same thing serving the existing centers and build those up so that ridership is steady ALL DAY not just at rush hours.

"Also, the Purple Line could make a small jog from Wilshire onto Santa Monica to head through Century City and return to Wilshire in time for Westwood without having to make a huge detour up by Cedars Sinai and the Beverly Center"

Matthew, the detour to Beverly Center/Cedas Sinai is the same distance or actually a shorter distnace than the one from Century City. When it goes all that way up to WeHo is when it's MUCH bigger.

[Amir K]

I love how we can't even get the Wilshire line STARTED, yet are thinking of putting it somewhere else. Newsflash: both SA MO Blvd AND Wilshire Blvd need this kind of heavy investment. At this point, we're in a situation of "build it and they will ride", some of which is evident by the creation of the 704 Rapid Line to Santa Monica along Santa Monica Blvd. It does seem that the 720, 920 and 704 are now about equally busy, so the potential is definitely there.

As I'm a realist, the easiest thing to do is to have the Wilshire line quickly built to Westwood Blvd. By slightly adjusting the Westside's bus systems to all connect to this mega-hub, we can at least temporarily allocate funds that would have gone to the extension to Santa Monica into a Santa Monica Blvd rail. Or even the Green Line. Or anything at that point!

Let's see if any of this will happen...

[anti-nimby]

traveler:

you and shaun are right. At least start as a spur toward H&H before the red line heads through Cahuenga. Since you need some kind of turning radius and room for above ground emergency and maintenance facilities, and phase I (phase II really) ends at Fairfax, turn it through Hancock Park and head it north under Fairfax. I know you have the tar pits there, but that's been the problem all along (methane and all that). While you've got the specialized methane mitigation boring machines, use them to head north. It won't be nearly as expensive as deciding 20 years later to go toward WeHo. You may need to go deep to avoid archaeological problems near the Pits, but you gotta go through Wilshire anyway.

Put a stop near the Grove near 3d, and at SM. Turn it either SM or Hollywood/Sunset east toward Highland. Create a ped tunnel between the red and purple line near H&H (cheaper than linking the actual tracks) to allow all that Hollywood and WeHo development to take the train to the Grove and eventually the ocean. It would save some of the East Valley/Burbank/Glendale folk a trip too. They can get on at NoHo, switch at H&H, head down to Wilshire/Fairfax on the spur, then take the mainline all the all the way down to the beach when it hits 100 or more. Without it, they could go down to Wilshire/Vermont and head west, but that takes an extra 20-30 mins and may make the difference between car and train.

If eventually growth gets dense enough, add some frequent DASH shuttles or create a WeHo muni transit route to run around the Strip and SM. Eventually you may need the train under SM too, but you'll have the infrastructure to allow people to get close enough to stumble home from the bars. Of course, this does no one any good if the last train from WeHo is 12:24. Before any of this, MTA needs to extend hours to at least 2AM or offer 24 hour service, at least on weekends.

When they go the rest of the way down Wilshire, turn south on SM toward Century City. Put a stop near the start/end of that new transit lane, then turn under the golf course. I have no idea who owns the subterranean rights on that course, and what rights the CC may have to stop it, but it provides plenty of room to turn toward and onto Wilshire and head toward UCLA and the ocean.

[lsm]

Too many powerful conflicting motives prevent me from deciding if I prefer this proposed Purple Line detour. I pay taxes; as a myopic miser I must save the penny required to complete any Purple Line route by sacrificing the pound of productivity lost to gridlocked Westside traffic. I live in Westwood; as a staunch NIMBY I must interdict any Westwood stop because my hopelessly stupid children will fall down any subway entrance steps within a mile of our house and the woefully inept MTA will detonate cataclysmic explosions by tunnelling through mid-Wilshire in its efforts to bring poor people into my neighborhood. I have friends in the SGV; as an altruist I would scrap completing the Purple Line lest it appear to compete for funds for a Gold Line extension to Ontario. I work at Cedars-Sinai; as an egoist I would impose upon everyone who needs rapid access to the Westside by insisting on this expensive and lengthy detour which would cut minutes from my daily commute. And while I really am a tax-paying Westwood homeowner who has friends in the SGV and who uses the MTA (720 transferring to the 16/316 or the 4/704 transferring to the 16/316 /14/714) to get to work, I must drop my sarcasm long enough to urge the greatest good for the greatest number in the quickest time. We must complete the Purple Line directly down Wilshire -- with only a short detour to Century City. Only after this too long delayed but increasingly vital "backbone" line is finally completed can we tackle important spurs to West Hollywood and to the Red Line.

[Matthew]

Also, the Purple Line could make a small jog from Wilshire onto Santa Monica to head through Century City and return to Wilshire in time for Westwood without having to make a huge detour up by Cedars Sinai and the Beverly Center.

[Matthew]

I agree with Shaun. Save the West Hollywood connection for a separate, direct route up La Cienega or across Santa Monica. They'll build it someday eventually anyway.

I think it's not the most brilliant argument to argue about riders anymore when delving into the LA grid. There are people everywhere and both potential routes would surely have more riders than would a ridiculous Gold Line extension to San Bernardino.

[yours truly, johnny dollar]

When the deep purple falls over Cheviot Hills walls......
this will be tied up 'til the cows come home.
Who are you kidding.

[mike d.]

I posted this on the laist blog as well.

You could make the same argument about any number of neighborhoods. For the subway to really be appealing to the people who aren't already dependent on transit it needs to get from downtown to Santa Monica along the most direct route possible while still hitting major employment centers. Because of the density of offices along Wilshire (and in Century City on Santa Monica Blvd), and the residential density within a few miles of either side of the proposed line, that route makes the most sense. I agree that over time development will occur around the stops anyway.

Neighborhoods not directly on the Purple Line route could easily be served by short-distance buses w/ frequent service, like Dash, that would go to the nearest stations.

Right now just getting the Wilshire line funded and built will be a challenge enough. Let's not get ahead of ourselves and talk about spurs or other expensive diversions.

[traveler]

Making WeHo a spur of the Red Line makes more sense. The Purple Line should definitely jog through Century City on its way to Westwood and the ocean. THAT would be an important addition.

[Jean-Luc Turbo]

"The bulk of ridership would be coming from rush-hour work trips. But the offices generate very little activity during mid-days and virtually none on weekends..."

This comes across as a narrow understanding of how the subway has changed and continues to change people's transportation habits. The Red Line is busy throughout the weekday and throughout the week (and surprisingly oftentimes on the weekends) and serves office workers downtown, the working class, tourists and everyone else.

The Purple Line extension, along its Wilshire route, would in fact be busy during the times mentioned and the ridership that the offices generate probably would amount to little mid-day and weekend activity. But how about the rest of the 100's of thousands who live on or near this route? The quote above fails to acknowledge them.

If that's the reasoning to steer the Purple Line through West Hollywood, than it is one coming from a narrow perspective.

[Jean-Luc Turbo]

"The bulk of ridership would be coming from rush-hour work trips. But the offices generate very little activity during mid-days and virtually none on weekends..."

This comes across as a narrow understanding of how the subway has changed and continues to change people's transportation habits. The Red Line is busy throughout the weekday and throughout the week (and surprisingly oftentimes on the weekends) and serves office workers downtown, the working class, tourists and everyone else.

The Purple Line extension, along its Wilshire route, would in fact be busy during the times mentioned and the ridership that the offices generate probably would amount to little mid-day and weekend activity. But how about the rest of the 100's of thousands who live on or near this route? The quote above fails to acknowledge them.

If that's the reasoning to steer the Purple Line through West Hollywood, than it is one coming from a narrow perspective.

[Jean-Luc Turbo]

"The bulk of ridership would be coming from rush-hour work trips. But the offices generate very little activity during mid-days and virtually none on weekends..."

This comes across as a narrow understanding of how the subway has changed and continues to change people's transportation habits. The Red Line is busy throughout the weekday and throughout the week (and surprisingly oftentimes on the weekends) and serves office workers downtown, the working class, tourists and everyone else.

The Purple Line extension, along its Wilshire route, would in fact be busy during the times mentioned and the ridership that the offices generate probably would amount to little mid-day and weekend activity. But how about the rest of the 100's of thousands who live on or near this route? The quote above fails to acknowledge them.

If that's the reasoning to steer the Purple Line through West Hollywood, than it is one coming from a narrow perspective.

[Shaun]

they should just make it a spur off the purple line that would connect to the Red Line at Hollywood and Highland. making the purple line zig zag all over the place will not help with travel times that are meant to compete with the car.