Was L.A.'s $8-billion investment in rail worth the money?

L.A. County had made an huge investment in rail in the last two decades  -- building several light rail lines and a subway.

But was it worth it?

Although the region now has a gleaming system of subways and light-rail trains, some transportation experts say the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority's $8-billion effort — less operating costs — has done little to reduce traffic congestion or increase the use of mass transit much beyond the level in 1985, when planning for the Metro Blue Line began.

Rather than bolster ridership, these experts say, the emphasis on rail has come at the expense of the MTA's vast network of buses and may have cost the agency at least 1.5 billion passenger boardings from 1986 to 2006.

"Overall, the push for rail has forced transit ridership down," said Tom Rubin, a veteran transit consultant and former chief financial officer for the MTA's predecessor. "Had they run a lot of buses at low fares, they could have doubled the number of riders."

Rail transit advocates contend that it is premature to judge urban rail's performance because the local systems are not fully developed and have yet to substantially benefit from being part of a broad rail network.

Read Dan Weikel's story here. Tell us what you think.

Photo: Marcia Baker, 21, gives boyfriend Ramon Diaz, 20, a kiss while riding the Metro Blue Line with fellow commuters in Los Angeles. Credit: Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Greg]

Rails don't go where people work! Haven't they figured that out yet? Build a subway between downtown and santa monica that stop IN santa monica and not in an area where's there's nothing around and I can tell you a lot of people are going to use it. Weekends will be amazing, no traffic on the 10 to go the beach, weekdays will be much better too.

[Urban]

Great, our state is in the brink of collapse and they spend *cough* 8billion on this? how does it get paid off when people are losing their jobs? whois gonna be able to afford to ride on it? What rubbish!!!

[Thomas]

I take the Riverside line to Union Station from Industry and it is packed! I than take the Red Line to Normandie which is also full. When I go to Union Station on the Purple Line it is standing room only! And the Metrolink train back to Industry is an every man/woman for his or her self to get a seat! Of coarse it's worth it! Can you image everyone on the Metrolink link and Subway each driving a car? The 60 would be more of a disaster as it already is. And people that ride these trains are all professionals, not people just scoring a free ride. If their were more lines and trians I feel traffic in LA will decrease.

[RUDOLPHE]

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE 710 FREEWAY TUNNEL ??

[alex]

Wow, the LA Times finally put in print what transit experts (including our own MTA) have always said -- rail does reduce traffic. But some people continue to argue that if we keep building enough rail somehow traffic will get better. These people need to visit New York, London, or Tokyo where they have the most complete transit systems in the world and the worst traffic on the planet. All rail does is allow more commuters in and out of any given area. But since we live in a capitalistic society this capacity also allows more real estate development. And taller buildings and more people always leads to more traffic.

[LizzyJ]

Whenever I go into Downtown LA I use the MetroRail. I can get into downtown in 60 min +/- 5 minutes. If this is going to work, Culver City, Westwood, Santa Monica and Downtown LA needs to be connected.

[malt liquor drinker]

waste of money, I road it back in the 90's but they make it all to places I never need to go.

[HateTheBusInLA]

Tom Rubin has his head in the sand. Riding the bus in LA is such a horrid, miserable experience there is NO way ridership would double. More busses just add to congestion on the streets and that is the problem. Cars, trucks, and busses clogging our city streets that were designed for traffic of the 1930's-1950's. Commuting long distances on a bus is not efficient, light rail is the only way to go. We should be ashamed of ourselves for waiting so long and spending $8 billion in today's dollars when we could have something already like BART in the SF Bay Area for a lot less if we broke ground in the 1970's. Low price is not the issue, reliable transportation that gets you from Point A to Point B in a reasonable time IS the issue. Solve that and you will see ridership go up.

[Sad Sad City]

I’ve been a daily blue line rider from the Artesia station to downtown and back since 1995. My experience in those 16 years is that it’s the best advertisement against taking public transportation that anyone could have ever dreamed up. When it’s not broken down (which is a twice weekly or more occurrence), it’s a full of trash, stinking sewer where anything and everything goes. Regulations for riding the train are never enforced. It’s always full of drugged up, loud and foul-mouthed dips with their feet in the seats and every other manner of ick this city has to offer. I’ve spoken to many MTA representatives regarding the conditions on the blue line every year at the community events where they have information booths set up and the excuse has always been the same, “well, it’s not going to change – it’s the ‘blue line.”

Of all the other downtown workers that started riding the blue line when I did, I’m the only person left. Everyone eventually gave up and went back to their cars. They all, especially the women, were too disgusted and/or too scared by the daily crap you have to put up with riding the blue line.

Five years ago at a conference at USC, I met one of the design engineers who originally worked on the blue line project and he said because of the daily overcrowding and lack of maintenance that (despite replacing a number of them) the blue line’s cars useful life capacity of 25 years (from the time it started service) had already been passed. In other words it’s not even safe to ride it anymore. Because of the irresponsibility by the MTA and its board of directors this is just another example of Los Angeles rapidly becoming the trashiest, low-class big city in America.

[ZethByrd]

I have no car, and take buses daily to/from work, SF Valley to Eagle Rock. Some of it is on the MTA buses, some on another carrier. I also use the subway nearly every week. Works well for me.

If the MTA were to look at the heavy traffic freeways and roads, and then run bus service parallel, it might take traffic off the highways. One hopes this is what they do!

I've found virtually every driver helpful and competent, and EXTREMELY patient with some of the people allowed to drive. I wouldn't be so calm in the face of such idiocy!

[RUDOLPHE]

THE COMPLETION OF THE 710 FREEWAY , IS A MORE EFFICIENT WAY TO SPEND TRANSPORTATION MONEY...

[Michael Freed]

The subway in LA is just getting started. You can't judge it over 20 years. Maybe in another 20 years it will be widely usable, maybe not. Big mistakes like not connecting with major airports or running along major corridors like Wilshire Blvd. don't help.

[Michael Freed]

...and the Sepulveda Pass

[charles]

LA rail system is not interconnected. It useless WITHOUT coherent interconnection of different light rails. Learn from Paris, France how the rail systems are interconnected and fully efficient for rail users.

[william freda]

the routes are what creates ridership.Valley to
west LA with connections to downtown and west LA to
LAX would have been a very profitable route there are
minimal options from the valley to the west side of LA.The
405 freeway seems to be the only access for any type of
public transportation.

[Joshua Glawson]

I agree with several others on here that have replied; there should be either a decrease in cost or a flat fee for connecting lines (one small fee pays for the whole day until you leave the stations) much like transit in NYC. Traffic in Los Angeles and SoCal will probably never truly be solved because it is too late in road construction, neighborhoods, businesses, etc... however, it could lighten up a bit with cheaper transit fees. If it were free then you would probably see an increase in train use and a decrease in traffic, but I don't think LA would do that. Why not test it for a couple of weeks just to see?

[T Sing]

Instead of ONE new lane down the 405 why don't they put in a light rail that hooks up with the RED Line in North Hollywood and the GREEN line down by the airport? They system needs to be more rider friendly and make sense. Stopping one mile away from the airport is ridiculous. Having to switch from the GOLD line to the RED to connect with the BLUE is also ridiculous.

[Trace Hartman]

The rail in LA has come a long way in the last few years. The opportunity for significant betterments are abound. We are lucky to have such a progressive plan. I remember the Gold line was just a dream. Now it's the envy of many visitors that ride it.

Can't wait for the west side to open up. That will be a huge change.

What about the Green line to the airport? How about writing about that line?????

[Tim]

I agree with R U Joking?!

[A.H.]

As a converted driver to the bus system, I have to agree with many of the posters here that the rail system is not a complete solution to the traffic issues that plague LA. There are very few avenues to get from the suburban areas into the commercial ones. Downtown is fairly easy to access, but not for those in the SF Valley or most of the westside. Additionally, there is no rail solution to get into the westside for daily commuters and OC coverage is sporadic at best. To be fair, LA has a lot more ground (and mountains) to cover than a New York or Boston, but they will have to cover these areas sufficiently to make the rail project a success.

[Frank M Sifuentes]

We are taling 'disappointed expectations' here...naturally.

The time will come SOON: when the majority overwhelming will KNOW it is
a matter of being OVERLY brainwashedby the CAR CULTURE. For example
the teen-agers and those with the wild WEST MENTALITY of having one's
own horse very nearby to gallop back and forth,

And needless to say: The CAR INDUSTRY continues to portray having your
own HORSE POWER is a realization of the perfect AMERICAN DREAM.

iT WONT BE HAPPY UNTIL IT KILLS US ALL!!

[matt]

MTA Rail system issues which affect the system:

1) Slow.
2) No quick route to LAX/Westside
3) Does not run late enough.

Examples: Pasadena to Convention center requires changing lines 3x ($1.75 x3 ) and takes 3-4x longer than driving.

Late night trips to attractions/clubs/concerts/restaurants in downtown LA or Hollywood require you to take a car as the rail system shuts down too early.

Solutions: Run Rail faster. ( come on what's up with the snails pace through some neighborhoods!! ) Create express lines to move people from downtown/union to LAX/Westside. Make it more affordable. ( it is a serious % of one's daily wages if you earn minimum wage.. )

also better tie into other alternative transportation.

Stations need more secure places to park/lock bikes/mopeds etc..

[josh]

the subway is amazing when it goes where i need it to go. i'm in hollywood and use it when i need to go downtown, but that's about it. why it doesn't go any further west is beyond me. they need to take the subway all the way to the coast and LAX. as one reader pointed out too, the 405 is one of the most hated freeways, it would be highly beneficial to run a line down to orange county along the 405. it would also be beneficial if during the weekends, they ran it all night so that partygoers have a quick and reliable way to get around.

tourism is also one of the major revenue sources for this town. so many tourists want a quick and easy way to get from LAX to hollywood, beverly hills and the coast, but as it stands, there is no single easy way to get to all of those places.

i say all of this without taking into consideration the huge cost for all of this to happen. but if they wanted their investment to be worth it, they need to put the subway lines where they are going to be utilized the most. to me, having a line running to LAX is a no brainer and should be the first priority for a new line.

[Ryan]

Any investment in public transportation is worth it in the long run. It just has to be made more convenient and more affordable.

Metrolink has raised rates.

The money grubbers in North Hollywood have made 1/3 of the Metro parking lot paid permit parking only. Guess what, nobody parks there and now it's harder than ever to find a parking space even though 1/3 of the lot is empty. Way to go, NoHo. Way to discourage people from taking public transportation.

[c]

Yeah because it was too long of a wait.