MTA report calls for light rail, not rapid bus line, on Crenshaw corridor

A proposed transit line that will run through South Los Angeles should be light rail, not a rapid bus line, according to a report released by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

South L.A. officials and community groups cheered the recommendation from Metro staff and said the project estimated to cost at least $1.7 billion will provide unprecedented transit opportunities for residents who so far have been under-served by the county's rail network.

"We do consider it a victory," said Trevor Ware, chief operating officer of the Los Angeles Urban League.

"Look at the transportation options that we have now. We have buses on Crenshaw and we see other neighborhoods that are developing other types of transportation options," Ware added.

"To have a decision made that we will have light rail - that's so much faster and will have so much more of an economic impact - we need that too," he said.

The proposed line would run about 8.5 miles from the intersection of Exposition and Crenshaw boulevards, down Crenshaw, southwest through Inglewood and south to a stop near the airport and a connection with the Green Line.

About 2.5 miles of the project is proposed as a subway, including a section that would run underneath Leimert Park, said Metro's project manager Roderick Diaz.

The recommendation from Metro staff must still be approved by the planning and programming committee and then by Metro's board of directors.

Dan Rosenfeld, a senior deputy for L.A. County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, said the project could create some 7,800 jobs and that groundbreaking could begin as early as 2012 if funding can be secured.

-- Ari B. Bloomekatz

Map: MTA

More breaking news in L.A. Now:

Shouting, shoving at meeting on Southern California fishing restrictions

Michael Jackson's mother no longer objects to estate executors

L.A. County supervisors to name Buzz Aldrin 'honorary consul general to the moon'

L.A. school leaders, community groups to debunk inflammatory flier aimed at undocumented parents

Judge delays legal squabble between L.A. city attorney and controller

Judge considers allowance for Joe Jackson; new Michael Jackson estate allegations

Southern California police look for possible links to Cleveland serial-killer suspect

Santa Monica Pier to be anointed as Route 66 terminus

Dog rescued, another badly injured in Long Beach blaze

LAPD Chief-Designate Beck to appear at Mar Vista town hall

Comments

[David in Los Angeles]

great, start building.

[stewart]

still looking to read that the line, any line, actually goes to LAX?

[pmg]

Now we will have to battle all the people that are going to cry out that this is racist. Hasn't that been the problem in expanding some of the lines through this area? The above ground trains are somehow racist?

[Tornadoes28]

Good. The fact is is that buses are really not that efficient. Yes, they are cheaper but they do not move the most amount of people in the most efficient and quickest manner. As traffic increases on the streets, buses are slowed down.

The Bus Riders Union people don't seem to realize that.

People in their cars will not leave their cars to ride buses. But many car drivers will be more inclined to ride a train than a bus. That is just the fact of it. Sorry Bus Riders Union. We need more trains, not more buses.

[SUPERBLACK]

This is a major step towards reformatting this collection of communities we call our city. Let's get this thing underway and then on to the Wilshire Corridor.

[Pasadena'ed]

I commuted to Pasadena to Culver City via light rail & bus for a few years before moving to another job. I regularly use the bus for short trips around town on the weekend when I can, even though I'm part part of a 2-car, 1 motorcycle household. That said, I agree that light rail is the way to go. Fewer ANYTHING on the already clogged L.A. roads is a good thing; buses included. I wouldn't be too concerned about ridership either. It all depends on the route or corridor. I've NEVER been on an empty Gold Line, Green Line, Blue Line or Red Line train. As long as the route makes sense for most people and prices stay reasonable, people will ride the train.

[DMS]

To the above point. It's not just more trains, it's GRADE separated trains. To maximize efficiency trains must run apart from auto traffic.

No one will abandon their car to sit in traffic on a bus.

No one will abandon their car to sit in traffic on a train.

The only real alternative to cars is mass transit that runs apart from gridlocked auto traffic.

[Rail Student]

I am glad to see this happen. Its ridiculous how close LAX actually is to Koreatown, yet one could not arrive there under two hours without paying more than five dollars. The airport is not only for tourist, it also serves a working community and is a small city in itself, i.e. Westchester, El Segundo, Inglewood,Etc. Why must one horse shoe to get to those sides of town. Or take a slow zig zaggy bus route.

Rail is good. It connects everyone, and is not very prone to traffic. Only thing that bothers me about this is that these trains will be affected by traffic lights. Like Long Beach, and Downtown with the blue line south. How will this be engineered? And why not build all the way to Wilshire on the first go. Stop trifling! Look at LAX, look at MetroLink, look at Burbank Airport, and look at the Blue Line and Union....Have we learned anything?

[CS]

Why not connect the Crenshaw line with the Green Line track and run it down to the South Bay?

[ST]

To Tornadoes28:

You're wrong. Buses can move people cheaply *and* quickly - faster than car traffic - but you just have to grade separate them like you would light rail so they'll be out of traffic. San Jose has a light rail system that is as painfully slow as any bus running on the street. There is nothing inherently faster about using steel on steel instead of rubber on asphalt. This is going to cost far more than it needs to cost and thus reduce funds that could've gone to improve transit service in other parts of South LA. It's a political decision; I doubt a technical one.

[John]

As part of the measure R funds, I believe the green line is to be extended to the airport (and potentially other lines as well may meet the airport?). From there, people will transfer onto an airport people mover (its own railway) that will go to each terminal.

[Markus]

This is great news. I can't wait to take it to my fav BBQ joints in Leimert Park. One comment, funding....its time to write your congress rep to make it happen.

Also, I know I'm way ahead of this, but a third track for an Express. I took the blue line this past weekend and though comfortable it took time stopping at all the 19 stops we took. Having an Express to stop at 10 or a Rapid at 7 could shave valuable time. Same goes with the other rail lines.

[Sheryl]

All the "MTA support" in the world is nothing but an expensive boondoggle if the Crenshaw Line isn't GRADE SEPARATED.