New 'Subway to the Sea' route?

Should the "Subway to the Sea" run through West Hollywood rather than the Miracle Mile and Hancock Park? The Times' Rong-Gong Lin examines the issue:

After trying for three decades to build a subway down Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles County transit officials are now considering a radically different route that would send the Westside rail line though Hollywood, West Hollywood and the Beverly Center area. The new proposed alignment for the "Subway to the Sea" would extend west from the Hollywood/Highland Red Line station, roughly following Santa Monica Boulevard through Beverly Hills, a route that backers say should dip south to connect with the Beverly Center mall and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. The new concept is still in its preliminary stages, and the Wilshire alignment remains on the table. But even though officials don't have funding for the $6-billion project, the new concept has sparked much debate because of how crucial many officials see the subway to easing the Westside's traffic woes. The new route would bypass the Miracle Mile and Hancock Park, where opposition remains strong to a subway from residents in the upscale residential district. At the same time, officials and residents in Hollywood and West Hollywood are rolling out the welcome mat, saying the younger, apartment-living residents in that area would be more likely to take the subway.

Comments

[k]

When driving in LA, it's all about knowing the best shortcuts! For the first time ever, super shortcuts previously used only by couriers and ambulance drivers are now available for all of us to use!

check out: www.mytrafficshortcuts.com

[James]

All this talk about subways, reducing the traffic its all just talk, in all the time i have been here not much has happen.
I just don't know what the hold up is I say just get started, help us get to where we need to go. but in the mean time an just going to do what i have been doing, and that is just do what i can on the internet, i do my banking at BofA .com, my shopping at ShopdaddyO.com my new at cbs.com, i just stay away from the roads as much as possble, keep me from getting a headache.

[Dan W.]

"How's abouts we borrow some of those extra wide Wilshire Beverly Hills/Miracle Mile sidewalks that nobody ever uses and add a bus only lane on each side? Add more buses when the demand rockets up and PESTO!, you've just saved Several BILLION DOLLARS for some real positive spending money. (silly stuff like schools and old people) . Congratulations.
If seeing environmentally friendly buses whiz by them on Wilshire doesn't motivate the BHes and WEHOes to 'get out of their dreams and get into the bus' then screw em. "

-----------

If you really want to save billions of dollars, ignore Dantzer and other BRU-sympthatizers with their ridiculous bus-only transit vision for Los Angeles. When bus only lanes fail, or are repealed due to resentment from small business owners and single-occupancy motorists with an inflated sense of entitlement (as the bus-only lanes that were on Wilshire in West. L.A. lasted only about 30 seconds), we will have to build the needed rail lines we need anyway, only it will cost so much more in raw dollars later, not to mention lost productivity in the meantime.

We do need a strong, and comprehensive bus system, just like every other major metropolis in the world -- but as a supplement to a strong and comprehensive rail system.

If it weren't for Waxman, Yaroslavsky and NIMBYs we might already have and be using the Purple Line and Expo Lines to the sea. They may have come around, but it is 20 years and so much more expensive. Following the BRU's insipid agenda will make it that much even worse when it fails.

Only adding additional buses, without expanding our rail system, will only add to existing congestion without maintaining Los Angeles' economic and environmental sustainability. And it won't work.

Furthermore, bus-only lanes will not be the only lanes buses are in, for express and rapid buses will need to weave in and out of the remaining "regular" lanes to pass local buses.

Fortunately, the BRU made itself irrelevant with its immoral cries of "transit racism" and anti-rail diatribes.

We need the Purple Line finished as the subway-to-the-sea on Wilshire with a spur into Century City as soon as possible. As for Santa Monica Blvd, the only real argument is whether it should be heavy or light rail, but rail it must be.

The core of the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment is between La Cienega and Fairfax in West Hollywood. From La Cienega, the "Pink Line" can go south to the Purple Line and Expo Lines and eventually the airport or southwest to Century City. From Fairfax, the the line can go northeast to the Hollywood/Highland station, potentially into the Valley, or go east on Santa Monica to Sunset Junction, then into downtown through Silverlake and Echo Park.

I agree that the Purple Line is the highest priority, but Santa Monica Blvd is almost as high and we need BOTH to create a network and a system.

The Pink Line should not go to the Sunset Strip any further west than Fairfax, unfortunately. Sunset Blvd., while crowded like all Westside streets, doesn't even support an all-day express bus yet and it would be a waste of transit resources to choose an alignment on Sunset west of Fairfax, which would deprive the much more heavily traveled portions of this area on Santa Monica Blvd. of rail. (Besides, the City of West Hollywood wants any rail alignment on Santa Monica Blvd.) Maybe we can make some quaint "Angels Flight" type tourist transport advice to take club goers up to their nightclubs on Sunset Blvd.

The Santa Monica Blvd. alignment not only has east-west value, but north-south value, making it easier to go to/from the Westside to/from the Valley, which anyone who has snaked through the Sepulveda Pass or a Canyon road knows a public transit alternative is desperately needed.

We need both. First Purple Line to the sea, then the Santa Monica Blvd alignment with extensions.

And, we can all be glad the BRU has declined in relevance and influence.

People who want better bus service should continue lobby for it and our bus service needs to get better. However, it is not an either/or issue. Bring on the rail!

[Dan W.]

"How's abouts we borrow some of those extra wide Wilshire Beverly Hills/Miracle Mile sidewalks that nobody ever uses and add a bus only lane on each side? Add more buses when the demand rockets up and PESTO!, you've just saved Several BILLION DOLLARS for some real positive spending money. (silly stuff like schools and old people) . Congratulations.
If seeing environmentally friendly buses whiz by them on Wilshire doesn't motivate the BHes and WEHOes to 'get out of their dreams and get into the bus' then screw em. "

-----------

If you really want to save billions of dollars, ignore Dantzer and other BRU-sympthatizers with their ridiculous bus-only transit vision for Los Angeles. When bus only lanes fail, or are repealed due to resentment from small business owners and single-occupancy motorists with an inflated sense of entitlement (as the bus-only lanes that were on Wilshire in West. L.A. lasted only about 30 seconds), we will have to build the needed rail lines we need anyway, only it will cost so much more in raw dollars later, not to mention lost productivity in the meantime.

We do need a strong, and comprehensive bus system, just like every other major metropolis in the world -- but as a supplement to a strong and comprehensive rail system.

If it weren't for Waxman, Yaroslavsky and NIMBYs we might already have and be using the Purple Line and Expo Lines to the sea. They may have come around, but it is 20 years and so much more expensive. Following the BRU's insipid agenda will make it that much even worse when it fails.

Only adding additional buses, without expanding our rail system, will only add to existing congestion without maintaining Los Angeles' economic and environmental sustainability. And it won't work.

Furthermore, bus-only lanes will not be the only lanes buses are in, for express and rapid buses will need to weave in and out of the remaining "regular" lanes to pass local buses.

Fortunately, the BRU made itself irrelevant with its immoral cries of "transit racism" and anti-rail diatribes.

We need the Purple Line finished as the subway-to-the-sea on Wilshire with a spur into Century City as soon as possible. As for Santa Monica Blvd, the only real argument is whether it should be heavy or light rail, but rail it must be.

The core of the Santa Monica Blvd. alignment is between La Cienega and Fairfax in West Hollywood. From La Cienega, the "Pink Line" can go south to the Purple Line and Expo Lines and eventually the airport or southwest to Century City. From Fairfax, the the line can go northeast to the Hollywood/Highland station, potentially into the Valley, or go east on Santa Monica to Sunset Junction, then into downtown through Silverlake and Echo Park.

I agree that the Purple Line is the highest priority, but Santa Monica Blvd is almost as high and we need BOTH to create a network and a system.

The Pink Line should not go to the Sunset Strip any further west than Fairfax, unfortunately. Sunset Blvd., while crowded like all Westside streets, doesn't even support an all-day express bus yet and it would be a waste of transit resources to choose an alignment on Sunset west of Fairfax, which would deprive the much more heavily traveled portions of this area on Santa Monica Blvd. of rail. (Besides, the City of West Hollywood wants any rail alignment on Santa Monica Blvd.) Maybe we can make some quaint "Angels Flight" type tourist transport advice to take club goers up to their nightclubs on Sunset Blvd.

The Santa Monica Blvd. alignment not only has east-west value, but north-south value, making it easier to go to/from the Westside to/from the Valley, which anyone who has snaked through the Sepulveda Pass or a Canyon road knows a public transit alternative is desperately needed.

We need both. First Purple Line to the sea, then the Santa Monica Blvd alignment with extensions.

And, we can all be glad the BRU has declined in relevance and influence.

People who want better bus service should continue lobby for it and our bus service needs to get better. However, it is not an either/or issue. Bring on the rail!

[n in studio city]

jjj -

if you are not native american - how about we repatriate your a$$$ back to your forefather's country.

[jjj]

Almost all of calf's population growth over the past 10 years has come from immigrants and their children.Can this go on? Imagine the improvement if we repatriated illegal aliens instead of providing "sanctuary".

[Jennifer Reyes]

Monorail!

Monorail!

Monorail!

Jay, get your head out of your arse. The construction of a monorail system along a busy arterial street will not be very quick.And if you are going to build an elevated system might as well take the Red/Purple Line cars out of the ground and run them down the boulevard.

[Alvin]

I agree with the call to build both. Find the funding. Get it done. And in the meantime, make pico and olympic one way streets from the ocean to downtown. Not after 5 years of studying the idea, but NOW. ASAP. At least until the subway is built. If you must do an impact study, start with a 5pm drive from Santa Monica to downtown. Hit wilshire on monday, santa monica on tuesday, olypmic on wednesday, the 10 fwy on thursday and pico on friday - and the case will become crystal clear in less than a week.

[Transit Planner]

Why not build a streetcar on Santa Monica Blvd. and the subway down Wilshire (with a diversion to Century City) ? I picture something like the extremely popular F-Market streetcars in San Francisco, but we could use refurbished PCC "Red Cars." Streetcars would be much cheaper than a subway and would be a good fit for the West Hollywood area. It is very much like Upper Market in San Francisco.

[Dantzer]

Sure, build them both. Then we'll have 2 'sinkholes to the sea'.
The Expo pricetag just went up almost 25% and the construction just started. What could possibly go wrong with miles of tunneling in a seismically challenged cheese log?
Building just one route will cost at least twice the estimated SIX BILLION DOLLARS, and take at least a decade to finish. (Can you folks even think about what traffic will be like in 10+ years without hurling?- I can't)
How's abouts we borrow some of those extra wide Wilshire Beverly Hills/Miracle Mile sidewalks that nobody ever uses and add a bus only lane on each side?
Add more buses when the demand rockets up and PESTO!, you've just saved Several BILLION DOLLARS for some real positive spending money. (silly stuff like schools and old people) . Congratulations.
If seeing environmentally friendly buses whiz by them on Wilshire doesn't motivate the BHes and WEHOes
to 'get out of their dreams and get into the bus' then screw em. That's what they get for not allowing a grid-completing freeway to run through it in the first place.

[Cathy]

I think Hollywood is in a crisis situation now. In the last couple of weeks, We seem to have finally reached saturation on all roads. You should send an LA Times reporter to Fountain Ave. at 8 a.m. any regular weekday morning to see the gridlocked traffic that just doesn't move. I drive down to Fountain and wait 10 minutes before I can merge into the traffic. It is mostly estbound traffic in the morning and eastbound traffic at night.

I don't know how the traffic statistics are gathered, if side streets are measured, too, but EVERY side street is clogged. One morning, I expect everyone to simultaneously call into the office saying that they just can't get there.

It is not just Hollywood - in Beverly Hills, you need to look at Elevado, Carmelita, Lomitas, Lexington. Most of these streets have stop signs at almost every corner, and yet drivers are packing these streets. I'm surprised that BH residents aren't complaining or lobbying to make the streets private.

I am not afraid to walk the 3 miles to Wilshire, or the 2 miles to the Redline station. I take the same route the bus takes, and I usually get there before I ever see a bus.

Yes, we need both rail lines and we need them yesterday!

[jay handal]

Both routes make sense, but the subway is unaffordable and not possible. We should be looking at alternate tecnology like a monorail which costs 1/4 the price and can be prefabricated and built in less than 5 years. Based on current today costs, we could build both routes as a monorail, and have money left over for a north south route from the I-14 to the south bay. We need to deal with reality, which is something our elected officials are not doing. IF the Expo line is already 135 million over budget, just thik of the subway. It will be built, according to MWEtro, by 2030 and end at La Cienega. This is not what we need. So, when doing an FEIS, MEtro should seriously consider alternative transportation, and I do not mean a bus lane taking up valuable commuter lanes.

[Dan W.]

Those of us who fervently believe in the “Pink Line” do not see this as a distraction to the Purple Line, but as a vitally important project in itself. If the Pink Line is proposed as an LRT instead of subway, I don’t think that would be objected to by many who want a rail line of some sort built.

The Pink Line has even been mentioned as a possible northern branch of the Crenshaw Line as an LRT, going up San Vicente to Santa Monica and then cutting over to Hollywood/Highland, in addition to the idea of a Hollywood/Highland to Century City extension. I like the idea of it going from H/H to LaBrea/Santa Monica then to LaCienega/SantaMonica to the LaBrea stop of the Expo Line as a vital north/south link.

While I agree with everyone who believes the Purple Line is the first priorty, that doesn’t meant that Pink Line supporters are throwing a wrench into the works or getting in the way or cluttering the issue.

According to Jody Litvak of the MTA in a City Beat interviewre, It came as a surprise to the MTA and probably to others who just assumed Wilshire would be the only option on offer how much support there is for some sort of Santa Monica Blvd. project, whatever modality that turns out to be.

It makes sense and is quite frankly their duty as trusted servants and guardians of their city that the civic leaders in West Hollywood would work to try and ensure their city wasn’t left out of the rail system altogether as may have seemed likely if they hand’t lobbied to get the MTA’s attention. They at least have the MTA’s attention that there is need and popular support for something whereas if they haven't lobbied they may have been left with nothing. Look how long it took for the popular Rapid 704 to go into service.
I would expect the City of WeHo and other Pink Line supporters to keep lobbying for it enthusiastically, as they should. However, I wouldn’t fear it. After 20 years of waiting, I cannot conceive the MTA will not go for the Wilshire alignment first.

If the Pink Line is proposed as an LRT going to Century City, I wonder if the MTA has the right to kick off those parking structures on their former track land in Beverly Hills. Beverly Hills doesn’t seem to want a Santa Monica Blvd. stop at this time. If some Pink Line modality is built, it seems those who lobbied for a Beverly Connection / Cedar Sinai stop will be in luck and those who have their hearts set on taking rail to the Grove may not be, but who knows at this point.

BOTH of these alignments need to be built and should be in the MTA's Long Range Transportation Plan. Everyone has expected a Wilshire alignment. The fact that support for a "Pink Line" has arisen is the process at work. There is nothing to fear here for those, like myself, who believe completing the Purple Line to the sea through Century City is the top transit priority. I’m a believer in a rising tide lifting all boats. The more interest there is in mass transit anywhere in So. Cal. helps the cause of mass transit everywhere in So. Cal.

One more thing. There is a big difference between Pink Line supporters and the Cheviot Hills NIMBY trying to get the Expo line detoured to Venice-Sepulveda.

The support for the Pink Line is genuine and comes from the people who live and work and play in those communities and genuinely want it. It is not being proposed as an alternate roots by the Hancock Park old guard trying to stop the Purple Line.

I have yet to hear anyone who supports the Pink Line to say it should be built INSTEAD of the Purple Line. The fact that any part of So. Cal. enthusiastically wants mass transit and will lobby for it is something for all transit advocates to celebrate, IMO.

As a side note, Beverly Hills has a preference for the Wilshire alignment, so it’s politically easier at this point to go forward with that.

As much as I would love to ram a Crenshaw Blvd. stop down the throats of people in Hancock Park who have been fighting a subway for years, perhaps the MTA should put off committing to building a Crenshaw stop just to get the line built and through. But that’s for another thread.

[David T]

Why not do both if we can find the money and commitment? Just the idea excites me!

[matt]

How about both routes? They are both equally as important.

[matt]

How about both routes? They are both equally as important.

[John Thompsen]

NO! NO! NO! Good grief, what are these guys on the MTA smoking, anyway? The subway must run down Wilshire Blvd - that is LAs main boulevard.

[greg]

Have a bake sale, and make it a hybrid - heading out of Hollywood/Highland to La Cienega, then due south to meet up with the original route. But please, please - whiile you're down there - put in an extra tunnel for some rush hour express trains!

[Sanchez]

I think that both routs should be built. First the Wilshire one and then the West Hollywood one. Red line would stay the same for now. Purple line will go to Santa Monica via Wilshire. Another line would be created that would go from North Hollywood to Santa Monica via the other proposed rout (West Hollywood).

[Ray]

I can't believe I'm the first person to post a response to this? Where are all the rail boosters? Glad somebody is still dreaming creatively at the MTA.

Before we accept the facts presented by Rong-Gong Lin... Does the subway still harbor strong opposition in Hancock Park and the Miracle Mile? Really? What recent poll/sudy suggests that is the case? Pardon my skepticism. Hasn't the world changed a great deal since the tunnel boring machines last fell silent?

I like the map, The alternate route depicted has a lot of merit thru West Hollywood and to Century City. What will be interesting to see is how these extensions develop. Why not build both?

[so]

This map is genius. Lots of young people, great shopping areas, and entertainment venues exist near the proposed new leg of the route. This subway should already be built!!

[manuel]

How about building both options. Both are greatly needed.

[manuel]

How about building both options. Both are greatly needed.

[Cathy]

PLEASE extend the subway in Hollywood! The article stated that there is more bus ridership on Wilshire, but maybe that is because there are more Rapid buses and it is farther away from the Red Line, at least at the west end. Going east down Santa Monica blvd. is not a good option, and the phantom #2 bus on Sunset is spotted about as often as UFO's.

Hollywood has more traffic than Hancock park. Let them sit in their fancy cars in gridlock and put the subway where it will definitely be appreciated!

[RB]

BUILD THEM BOTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!