LOS ANGELES | Transportation News & Discussion

[202_Cyclist]

Pesto- congestion pricing, such as that being tried on thet 10 and 110 in Los Angeles works because drivers have differing elasticities of demand. The untolled lanes will remain congested and drivers who have a high value of time will have the option of using the relatively free-flowing carpool lanes. The cost of driving in these lanes will rise until the flow of traffic reaches a certain desired speed, by pricing those drivers with a lower value of time out into the more congested untolled lanes. For example, if someone is late for a meeting, they would be willing to pay the higher toll for the ability to travel 45 mph. Not all drivers have the same value of time constantly, however. The same driver willing to pay the high amount might be willing to wait in traffic when traveling to a recreational activity or running errands on his/her day off.

Cities such as Stockholm that have used congestion pricing successfully use the money collected from the tolls to invest in increased transit service, thereby improving travel times on the remaining untolled lanes and also giving those motorists who do not wish to pay the tolls an alternative to traveling by private vehicle.

For a more complete analysis of the economics of congestion pricing, you should read "The Value of Value Pricing," by Kenneth Small in the Spring 2001 issue of Access magazine ( http://www.uctc.net/access/access18lighter.pdf )

[202_Cyclist]

Another reason why congestion pricing, such as that being tried on the 110, has the potential to reduce traffic is that it encourages drivers to make discretionary trips during nonpeak hours. Approximately 20 percent of trips are commutes to/from work. Charging a toll which is priced higher during the morning/evening rush hours encourages motorists making discretionary trips to travel during less congested times. Even on LA's crowded freeways, there is usually sufficient capacity during the offpeak hours such as the middle of the day. Only a small percentage of the drivers need to switch to these offpeak times for there to be a noticeable reduction in congestion during the rush-hour commutes. An example of this can be seen in Washington, DC during the summer vacation season. Although the number of vehicles on the road might only decrease by 5-8% when these people are away, commute times might decrease by a much greater amount.

[Quixote]

I'm back from Alaska and Atlanta! Let's get this thread rolling again, shall we?


Here's the latest presentation from the August 2009 meetings of the Westside Subway Extension...

http://www.metro.net/projects_studie...ation-0809.pdf

[Quixote]

Here's a good idea. If you have a station at Robertson (rather than La Cienega), the transfer to/from the Purple Line would be made much easier. La Cienega would still be served by an extra portal (from the San Vicente station), Beverly Hills would enjoy a third station (right on the border), and the stop spacing would be much better.


From The Transit Coalition, by metrocenter

[mwadswor]

I like the West Hollywood subway, the location makes a lot of sense, but I am a bit confused by the alignment, or at least how I am seeing the alignment on all the maps.

It looks like it is being proposed as either interlining with the west end of the purple line, then branching off to Hollywood, or a short line from the purple line up to Hollywood. Wouldn't it make a lot more sense if it was either a branch of the red line or a branch of the eastern portion of the purple line? That way you get increased service through the middle of LA (on either the red or purple line) rather than increased service on the end of the line. Ideally, wouldn't it make even more sense if it was interlined with both and you could get a loop from Union Station, out the red line, down the West Hollywood subway, and back down the purple line to Union Station? That way you get increased service on the central portions of the line with branches out the northern red line and the western purple line.

Maybe I'm just reading the map wrong, but I just don't think the West Hollywood subway will be utilized as much if people coming from central LA, who may have already made a transfer from the gold/blue/expo line, have to transfer again to get to it. Are there really that many people going from West Hollywood to Santa Monica?

I understand that there are concerns about disrupting service on the red line if the West Hollywood line were built to connect directly to it, but you would only have to shut down one of the two tunnels at a time, and it seems to make a lot more long term sense to have the option of running a train directly from Union station to West Hollywood.

[Quixote]

^ Interesting points. I don't think the shared double track could accommodate a third rail line. Regarding the "loop", I don't think it's feasible either. Trust, it's been suggested before.

[JDRCRASH]

Regarding the Crenshaw Corridor: I think the San Vincente Blvd Cedars Sinai option should actually be a branch of the Corridor, with the other being the La Brea branch.

[Quixote]

Villaraigosa Says Local Governments Should Unite in Effort to Finish Westside Subway [Updated]

By Dan Weikel
August 20, 2009

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa called today for speeding up construction of the $6.1-billion Westside subway extension, currently scheduled for completion in 2036 -- when he will be 78. [Updated at 3:10 p.m.: The subway would only reach Westwood by 2036, and the mayor would be 83. The cost at that point would be $4.1-billion. The entire $6.1-billon project would extend the line to Santa Monica, and no timetable has been set for that.]

As the most outspoken advocate for the so-called Subway to the Sea, the mayor has long been frustrated by that timetable and it was evident again when he and other officials gathered for a news conference in a UCLA parking lot. There, final soil samples had been drawn for a line that would follow Wilshire Boulevard from downtown Los Angeles to Santa Monica.

"I’m 56 now,” the mayor said. “We are here today to make sure that it gets built before I am 66.”

The key, Villaraigosa and the others said, is for local governments to put aside their differences over planned transportation projects and create a coordinated effort to secure enough federal money to expedite the subway extension as well as other key projects called for in Measure R, the county’s half-cent sales tax for transportation projects passed in November.

“We need a unified approach to get federal money," said Glendale Councilman Ara Najarian, who chairs the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority board of directors. "We need to bring the MTA board together. If it all comes together, we will be a force to be reckoned with. We will be able to advance all our projects.”

[dktshb]

Make them start tunneling tomorrow, damn it. From the looks of it, it appears that any extension of the red line will be after the purple line already goes to Santa Monica. I would rather the work be simultaneous. Getting the purple and red line meeting up around La Cienega will make a world of difference and can be done in our lifetime and should be the immediate focus.

Oh, and a stop somewhere close to Cedars and the Beverly Center is essential. I would also bring the purple line up to 3rd and have the stop on 3rd and Fairfax after the La Brea Wilshire stop so you have the Grove, Farmers Market, Pan Pacific Park, CBS and all the Park La Brea folks served rather well. Wilshire isn't that far to the south but apparently for most folks walking a couple of blocks is off-putting.

[phillyscooter]

Originally Posted by dktshb

Wilshire isn't that far to the south but apparently for most folks walking a couple of blocks is off-putting.

Yes, nobody walks in LA....

[Quixote]

Originally Posted by dktshb

Make them start tunneling tomorrow, damn it. From the looks of it, it appears that any extension of the red line will be after the purple line already goes to Santa Monica. I would rather the work be simultaneous. Getting the purple and red line meeting up around La Cienega will make a world of difference and can be done in our lifetime and should be the immediate focus.

From what I've read, the Purple Line will only reach Santa Monica if Expo goes over capacity. Otherwise, the West Hollywood spur is of a higher priority (as it should be, IMO).

Oh, and a stop somewhere close to Cedars and the Beverly Center is essential. I would also bring the purple line up to 3rd and have the stop on 3rd and Fairfax after the La Brea Wilshire stop so you have the Grove, Farmers Market, Pan Pacific Park, CBS and all the Park La Brea folks served rather well. Wilshire isn't that far to the south but apparently for most folks walking a couple of blocks is off-putting.

A Beverly Center/Cedars-Sinai station is definitely included in the plans. The option to bring the Purple Line north to the Grove/Farmers Market was eliminated awhile back because of cost-effectiveness. It's only a 0.6-mile walk from Wilshire/Fairfax. Most people are only willing to walk a maximum of 0.25 miles, but for me it's nothing.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

i was getting on the gold line today at Union station, and i started wondering where the boarding was going to be for the east LA Line? Both directions wont be sharing the one platform will they? will track 3 be used for east LA?

Also, i use the metro a few times every couple months and i have noticed that the gold line has been getting much more use every time im on there. Today it was literally packed like sardines on all trains with tons of people waiting for the next train. this was around 4:30 and there was a couple min delay, but still encouraging to see the higher usage. the red line was packed all day today as well in and around downtown.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

i was getting on the gold line today at Union station, and i started wondering where the boarding was going to be for the east LA Line? Both directions wont be sharing the one platform will they? will track 3 be used for east LA?

It'll be the same platform, as the rails have been extended. It'll shorten the wait, too, since Union Station on the Gold Line will be just another stop, not a terminus station; there's no transfer to the east side line as it's all one line now.

Incidentally, from what I've heard and read on the internet, the east side extension should be opening in October, though there's still no set date.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

i understand, but when one line is going to pasadena and another to east la, does one of the trains have to wait for the other to pass? where the actual loading happen?

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

i understand, but when one line is going to pasadena and another to east la, does one of the trains have to wait for the other to pass? where the actual loading happen?

No; if you notice the platform, there are tracks on either side of it; it's been that way since the current leg of the Gold Line opened. Sometimes the train would pull to the one side of the platform, sometimes it would pull to the other side of platform. And of course leaving Union Station on the Gold Line, sometimes the train leaves from one side of the platform, sometimes the other. Of course once the east side extension opens, it'll be two-way traffic for the trains from then on.

Here's a pic from Wikipedia of the Gold Line platform at Union Station. See, tracks and trains on either side:

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

wow, i have been on the gold line station platform 50 times and the last two days and i never noticed that there were rails on the other side as well. weird. thanks for the answers. One more question for you, do you know if they are going to add monitors to all the other lines to show when the next trains are coming? it is very useful, but its unfortunate that its only on the red and purple.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

wow, i have been on the gold line station platform 50 times and the last two days and i never noticed that there were rails on the other side as well. weird. thanks for the answers. One more question for you, do you know if they are going to add monitors to all the other lines to show when the next trains are coming? it is very useful, but its unfortunate that its only on the red and purple.

No prob. Actually, I don't know if they're going to install those monitors at all other metro stations. I've observed driving along the route of the east side extension that those new stations look like they do have some kind of electronic signs, that may announce when the train is arriving. Or, knowing the MTA, they might just announce useless information like the date, time, and that an elevator is out of order at the Wilshire/Normandie station.

The monitor signs on the subway stations are nice, but I wish it gave the arrival times of the next trains in real time, rather than just posting the scheduled arrival time. They may as well just have huge posters of the schedule at each stop, including the light rail lines. That would've been cheaper.

[sopas ej]

Kind of a misleading headline, but I blame that on the Pasadena Star News; of course technically the new Gold Line extension ends in East LA, but I guess Monterey Park is also technically blocks away from the end of the line:

Monterey Park gets Gold Line extension

By Dan Abendschein, Staff Writer
Posted: 08/27/2009 06:37:33 PM PDT

A $899 million, six-mile light rail extension form Downtown Los Angeles to Monterey park is nearing completion, officials said Thursday.

The project, originally scheduled to be completed this summer, is now expected to be finished before the end of the year, according to Metropolitan Transportation Agency spokesman Jose Ubaldo.

"We're doing some safety tests and fixing a few problems," said Ubaldo.

The project is under budget and the completion date should be announced within the next few weeks, he said.

The MTA is running trains to test the line, he said.

Officials hoped to open the line this summer, but a contractual deadline gives the agency until December.

Michael Cano, the transportation deputy for County Supervisor Michael Antonovich, said the summer deadline was always overly optimistic.

"The timeline was always kind of for December, and at some point they moved it up," said Cano. "They've had some issues, but nothing serious."

The six-mile extension will run from Union station through Boyle Heights and on to Monterey Park, ending at 3rd Street and Atlantic Boulevard, just south of the 10 Freeway. At Union Station it will connect with the Gold Line Foothill track that runs to Pasadena.

Assemblyman Mike Eng, D-Monterey Park, the head of the Assembly's Transportation Committee, said he expected the line to have a big impact on his district.

"It's taken a long time to go six miles, but we are very grateful this is going to get done," said Eng. "It's going to connect us to our jobs and our schools."
Eng is also hoping that the line will eventually run further through his district along the 60 Freeway, through Monterey Park, Rosemead and South El Monte, and out to the edge of Industry. Routes through Whittier are also being considered.

There is funding for a project extending the line further in Measure R, the half cent sales tax passed by voters in November, though the project is not scheduled to be completed in 2037.

dan.abendschein@sgvn.com

(626) 962-8811, Ext. 4451

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

There is funding for a project extending the line further in Measure R, the half cent sales tax passed by voters in November, though the project is not scheduled to be completed in 2037.

dan.abendschein@sgvn.com

(626) 962-8811, Ext. 4451

i just crack up when i read things like this. its like a bad joke

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

i just crack up when i read things like this. its like a bad joke

I know, why even bother putting that in.

And MAN, I realize in 2037, I'll turn 67. Will I still even be living in LA at that point? Or living at all?