HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West


View Poll Results: Which Mass Transit project should have the MTA's next priority?
Light Rail to Crenshaw Blvd, Norwalk/Santa Fe Springs and Del Amo Mall 7 2.11%
LIght Rail: Downtown Connector 65 19.64%
405 Freeway Corridor from Van Nuys to LAX 45 13.60%
Subway/Heavy Rail to Westwood 157 47.43%
Subway/Heavy Rail via Whitter Blvd 9 2.72%
Subway/Heavy Rail via Vermont Avenue 9 2.72%
Double Track and Electrify Metrolink Lines 22 6.65%
Other 9 2.72%
None 8 2.42%
Voters: 331. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Apr 26, 2006, 3:52 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
This is coming from the Daily News so you can take this with a grain of sand or salt

Article Launched: 4/26/2006 12:00 AM


Mayor fumbles MTA clout
City Hall officials ignore hearing on muting L.A. voice in transportation
BY HARRISON SHEPPARD, Sacramento Bureau
LA Daily News

SACRAMENTO - A bill that would reduce Los Angeles' influence on the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board sailed through a legislative committee Tuesday after nobody from L.A. City Hall showed up to oppose it.
The bill calls for Los Angeles to give one of its four seats on the 14-member board to the South Bay cities that are also part of the MTA system.

"I am absolutely in shock that the city of Los Angeles is not here in opposition," said Sen. Alan Lowenthal, D-Long Beach, who chairs the Transportation Committee. He noted that Los Angeles city officials had not even submitted a letter in opposition.

State Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, offered one possible explanation for city officials' absence: They don't care.

"The L.A. MTA has had not one but two 30-day strikes over the last several years, and nobody seemed to notice," McClintock cracked. "Why, then, would anybody notice a change in the representation of the MTA board?"

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa chairs the MTA board and has said transportation is one of the top priorities of his administration.

But a spokesman for the mayor could not explain why there was no representative at the hearing or why city officials had not previously made their position known.

"The mayor does oppose this," spokesman Darryl Ryan said. "There will be an `opposed' position from the (City) Council and the MTA in coming days."

City Hall representatives' absence was particularly puzzling because Villaraigosa had signaled strong interest in the MTA last year when he took office. He opted to personally chair the MTA board, while his predecessor, Mayor James Hahn, had allowed his deputies to attend the board meetings in his place.

Villaraigosa also has proposed an ambitious slate of projects for the agency, including an expanded subway to the sea, new light-rail lines and a better car-pool system.

Along with Villaraigosa, one City Council member and two citizens appointed by the mayor hold L.A.'s four seats on the MTA board, giving the city a strong voice in governance.

Others on the board are four members representing the 87 other cities in Los Angeles County; the five county supervisors; and a nonvoting member appointed by the governor, usually a representative of the California Department of Transportation.

A bill by Sen. Bob Margett, R-Diamond Bar, would let the Los Angeles mayor appoint only one and not two public members and give the other cities five rather than four appointees. The fifth would specifically be earmarked for a newly created South Bay sector.

The measure, Margett said, would create a board structure more in line with the distribution of population in the county.

"Presently there is an imbalance in the structure of the MTA, putting cities and communities at a disadvantage when it comes to equitable representation and funding," he said.

An MTA spokesman said the authority's board is expected to consider taking a position on the bill at its regular meeting later this month.

The proposal, Senate Bill 1507, passed through the Transportation Committee, 10-2. The three committee members whose districts include part of the city of Los Angeles - McClintock, Sens. George Runner, R-Lancaster, and Gil Cedillo, D-Los Angeles - all voted for the bill.

Runner said he supports the bill because it accurately reflects shifts in the county's population as L.A.'s suburbs boom.

While his district includes parts of the San Fernando Valley, he noted that other cities in his district, such as Palmdale and Lancaster, might benefit from shifting a vote away from Los Angeles.

"The key issue, it seems to me, is the board ought to be distributed based upon where people are living," Runner said. "That's to me what this adjustment was."

harrison.sheppard@dailynews.com

(916) 446-6723
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2006, 7:21 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
Just Dreamin'



__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?

Last edited by Wright Concept; May 9, 2006 at 7:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2006, 7:22 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...adlines-nation

From the Los Angeles Times
GOP Offers Consumer Fuel-Relief Package
It includes a $100 rebate, but its Arctic drilling component will probably doom it. Democrats' proposals are expected to fare no better.
By Maura Reynolds
Times Staff Writer

April 28, 2006

WASHINGTON — Fearing public ire over rising gasoline prices, Republicans on Thursday unveiled a series of proposals aimed at giving consumers some relief, including a $100 rebate.

Democrats derided the GOP plan, and its political chances appeared weak.

The Democrats said that although the package incorporated some ideas they already had introduced, it contained a provision that almost assuredly would torpedo its passage: opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling, a measure that repeatedly has stalled in Congress.

"Joining a rebate for consumers with [the drilling proposal] is not, I believe, a sincere effort," said Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.).

Emotion over fuel costs ran high on Capitol Hill, illustrated by a five-hour filibuster staged by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). He refused to leave the Senate floor in an effort — ultimately unsuccessful — to press for a vote on forcing oil companies to pay more to the government for the right to drill for oil on public land. Some of that drilling is exempt from payments.

"Government subsidies may be needed when the price is low, when we have to simulate production," Wyden said. But such relief is uncalled for "at a time when prices are soaring to record-high levels."

By the end of the day, the two parties essentially played to a draw — neither the rebate idea nor Democratic proposals, which include a moratorium on federal gasoline taxes, appeared to have much chance of becoming law.

But the theatrics made clear that each party wanted to demonstrate its sensitivity to rising prices — and wanted to direct public anger toward the opposing camp.

At an outdoor news conference with the Capitol dome as a backdrop, Republicans blamed the price surge on Democrats, who they said had blocked measures to increase oil production, such as drilling in the Arctic.

"Those who stand up and criticize … and suggest that somehow or another that the blame [for gasoline costs] is upon those of us who had been pushing for increased supply of energy in this country, I think they need to look in the mirror," said Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), chairman of a GOP task force that drew up the party's proposals. "Democrats are the ones who have simply blocked every attempt for us to build transmission networks — whether it's electric transmission networks, or whether it's oil and gas networks, or whether it's energy generating, or whether it's oil and gas production."

Democrats blamed the high prices on Republicans, who they accused of being too cozy with large oil companies and too eager to pass out tax breaks to them. They dismissed the rebate as a meaningless gesture, arguing it would wind up in oil company coffers because consumers would use it to buy gasoline.

"It is disappointing that neither skyrocketing gas prices nor obscene oil company profits can break the bond between Bush Republicans and Big Oil," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

The back-and-forth in Washington came as the world's largest publicly traded oil company, Exxon Mobil, reported first-quarter profits of $8.4 billion, up 7% from the first three months of 2005.

The increase fell short of Wall Street expectations. But the report accelerated the criticism of oil companies from politicians.

"Quarter after quarter, oil companies post unheard-of profits at the expense of farms, businesses and family budgets," said Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.).

"We need to figure out what's behind these prices and work together to put stronger consumer protections on the books."

The high gasoline prices — above $3 a gallon in some regions of the country — result from a confluence of forces that have constricted supply. Experts say few measures under discussion on Capitol Hill would have much effect.

"Unfortunately, there's nothing, really, that can be done that's going to affect energy prices or gasoline prices in the very short run," Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke told lawmakers at a hearing Thursday.

But with elections coming in November, lawmakers appeared undeterred.

"There is no silver bullet," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.). "There is nothing, nothing we can do that can compensate for the fact that today we're 60% dependent on foreign sources of oil. But we can put forth a bold agenda."

Under the Republican plan, a $100 rebate would be sent to taxpayers making less than $125,000 a year.

Stabenow has proposed a $500 rebate, which she said would cover the average cost of higher gas prices for most families.

The GOP package also called for:

• A summer suspension of the 18.4-cent-per-gallon federal retail gasoline tax, to be paid for by ending some oil industry tax breaks. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) previously proposed a 60-day gas-tax holiday.

• New authority for the Federal Trade Commission to investigate possible price gouging. Democrats accused Republicans of undermining their own proposal, however, by limiting the measure to retail pricing and excluding wholesale distributors from scrutiny.

• Increased incentives for the development and purchase of hybrid vehicles.

• New authority for the Department of Transportation to increase fuel efficiency standards for automobiles.

Many Republicans, including President Bush, previously had opposed raising those fuel efficiency requirements, known as CAFE standards. But on Thursday, Bush endorsed the idea.

At a gas station in Biloxi, Miss., Bush said he would "use it wisely if Congress would give me that authority."

Bush earlier this week announced steps that underscored his concern about gasoline prices, including a suspension of government oil purchases to refill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. But, as with the various congressional proposals, experts said the White House moves would have little impact on the rising fuel costs.

During his mini-filibuster, Wyden said existing royalty-payment breaks for oil companies had cost the federal government at least $20 billion in lost revenue.

"Oil companies are supposed to pay royalties to the federal government when they extract oil from federal lands. But in order to stimulate production of oil in our country, the federal government, over the last decade, has been discounting these royalty fees," Wyden said. "So, on top of the oil companies' record profits, record tax breaks and record prices consumers are paying at the pump, there are now record amounts of royalty relief granted to the oil companies as well."

Wyden's position earned quick support from at least one Republican, Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona. He offered to cosponsor Wyden's measure, which would suspend the subsidies whenever the price of oil topped $55 a barrel.

Still, votes on this and other proposals could be stymied by Senate rules. They have been offered as amendments to an emergency spending bill for the military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and for post-Hurricane Katrina relief efforts. Parliamentary procedures for the legislation may block action on the energy-related measures.

Times staff writer Elizabeth Douglass in Los Angeles contributed to this report.
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2006, 8:29 PM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,838
i hate our goverment, i really do. Think for the future and not for your pockets you cowardly, selfish , self serving fuckers. Like opening up anwr is going to do anything for the price of fuel for the next 10 years!! by that time, we should be off oil completely, but with these incompetent hacks in charge, we will be soley dependant of oil in 2015. were going backwards.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2006, 8:34 PM
Damien Damien is offline
Cool dude
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: LA-Leimert Park & Boston-Cambridge
Posts: 404
This is great example of what's wrong with the two parties in Washington. Republicans propose using the treasury to give money to taxpayers, a lot of whom really don't need it. Democrats propose using the treasury to better target the "rebate" and at a higher amount. In the mean time the culprits, big business (in this case Big Oil) is getting off scot free. In the case of Republicans, you can't bite the hand that feeds you, and they're always willing to throw just enough scraps to taxpayers to claim some type of populist slant. In the case of Democrats this is the difference between the modern American liberal and the progressive. Liberals try to offset the harm done by corrupt corporate America. Progressives want to use the power of the government to go after corrupt corporate America. If Democrats ever hope to win back middle America they'll take a far more progressive and populist approach to politics.

Last edited by Damien; Apr 28, 2006 at 9:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted May 9, 2006, 7:19 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
delete
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?

Last edited by Wright Concept; Jun 7, 2006 at 7:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted May 9, 2006, 7:26 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
MTA won't raise fares for one year
Reserves to be tapped
BY RACHEL URANGA, Staff Writer
LA Daily News

Metropolitan Transit Authority officials Monday announced a $3 billion budget for 2006-07, promising to expand bus and rail service and pay for it by dipping into reserves rather than raising fares.
Walking a financial tightrope, officials say they will put off rate hikes for one year and cover a projected $112 million deficit by draining reserves to just $66 million by the end of the budget year.

"We are doing everything we can," said Roger Snoble, the MTA's CEO. "Even though we are looking at difficulties in the future years, the money we are provided with we use very efficiently."

Snoble said raising rates is one of the few ways to help pay for the 1.2 million bus and rail boardings made daily.

But some MTA board members blame the agency's bloated bureaucracy, saying costs have soared and precious transportation dollars have been wasted on future projects.

"The agency has more fat in it that has been identified," said Zev Yaroslavsky, a Los Angeles County supervisor and board member. "There are funds now being spent on planning and analysis that are not likely to see the light day for many years."

Yaroslavsky says the agency has been reluctant to pare down soaring salaries and failed to rein in costs at construction sites.

"Every department of the agency has to be looked at. There can be no sacred cows," he said.

"Left to their own devices the MTA bureaucracy will propose a status quo budget. They will not move people around or make cuts where cuts make sense."

Noble, who calls his agency the country's "leanest," has cut 554 positions over the last four years. He said it has also increased ridership 4.7 percent and boosted fare-box revenues 9 percent over the last year. But the revenues - projected at $295 million - pale compared with the costs of operating rail and buses - about $1.1 billion.

The agency has also made $5 million in cuts to administrative departments, including $274 million from the CEO's office as well as deferring some construction work and putting off mechanical work on 20 older buses in the fleet.

At the same time, the MTA will continue plans to construct the Gold Line extension into Boyle Heights, design a Mid-City light rail project and complete the 101 Ventura Freeway overcross at the 405 San Diego Freeway.

The agency will also continue to extend bus services as required by a 10-year federal consent decree set to expire this year. Seven Metro Rapid lines will be opened over the next year including one through San Fernando Road and Lankershim Boulevard. Under the order, the MTA must continue expansion of bus services for poor and minority communities.

"This is a self-imposed budget crisis," said Manuel Criollo, lead organizer for the Bus Riders Union. Money should be spent on increasing Rapid bus service instead of investing high-cost subways and freeway projects.

"Again bus riders are going to be the ones left holding the bag."

rachel.uranga@dailynews.com

(818) 713-3741
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted May 9, 2006, 8:05 PM
LongBeachUrbanist's Avatar
LongBeachUrbanist LongBeachUrbanist is offline
Ridin' The Metro
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Metro Blue, Wardlow Stop
Posts: 2,578
Quote:
"This is a self-imposed budget crisis," said Manuel Criollo, lead organizer for the Bus Riders Union. Money should be spent on increasing Rapid bus service instead of investing high-cost subways and freeway projects.

"Again bus riders are going to be the ones left holding the bag."
Really, this is a BRU-imposed budget crisis. In all likelihood, the MTA decided not to raise fares in order to ensure that the Consent Decree will be allowed to expire this fall. The current expiration date is 29 October, which is five months and 20 days from today.


Next year it will most likely redo the fare structure, with fare hikes across the board. This is not only desperately needed, but also fair, given the increased fuel costs we all must pay.
__________________
COMPLETE THE CENTRAL SUBWAY BY 2020!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted May 9, 2006, 9:21 PM
ManMadeMound's Avatar
ManMadeMound ManMadeMound is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 95
Wow, the BRU is truly ludicrous. What do they really think they're going to accomplish with all of their tactics. They're worse NIMBY's then the people at the Daily News! They truly have tunnel vision and it seems like they've never looked back to see what has gone wrong with transit and what we can really do to fix it.
__________________
"In this world, there is a kind of painful progress. Longing for what we've left behind, and dreaming ahead." -Tony Kushne
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2006, 7:21 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
Here's my revised transit map for LA. I'm using a new designation for the Busway/BRT lines since they are part of the network. Just want to get some comments on how this looks and if this approach to the Busways will work for rail purists as well as keep this way-finding document honest.





__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?

Last edited by Wright Concept; Jun 21, 2006 at 9:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2006, 7:45 PM
Buckeye Native 001 Buckeye Native 001 is offline
E pluribus unum
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 31,262
Sweet.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2006, 8:53 PM
colemonkee's Avatar
colemonkee colemonkee is offline
Ridin' into the sunset
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 9,093
PV, do you imagine the Pink Line busway as an elevated busway above the 405?
__________________
"Then each time Fleetwood would be not so much overcome by remorse as bedazzled at having been shown the secret backlands of wealth, and how sooner or later it depended on some act of murder, seldom limited to once."

Against the Day, Thomas Pynchon
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Jun 7, 2006, 8:59 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
I don't know honestly, I'm just basing the 405 Busway (not the Pink line) as utilizing the HOV lanes with adjacent bus stations spaced about 2-5 miles apart similar to Metrolink for more long distance express routes with few stops from Antelope Valley/Palmdale all the way down to the South Bay.

I'm visualizing a parallel rail line next to it operating in a tunnel under the mountains with serving a more local interest, it could be an extension of the Purple Line with a branch off of Expo meeting at Westwood.

Both Busway and Rail would feed each other. To make sure you'd serve the Valley and Westside. And I think this would be the most effiecent and cost-effective model because we're maximizing the strengths of both busway and rail.
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?

Last edited by Wright Concept; Jun 8, 2006 at 4:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2006, 4:24 PM
colemonkee's Avatar
colemonkee colemonkee is offline
Ridin' into the sunset
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 9,093
^ I like it. We need to get you appointed simultaneously to the MTA and Senate Appropriations Committe.

But back to the title of this thread, "What's Next?", I think the Aqua/Expo line is definitely next. Literally overnight, they closed off one of the eastbound lanes of Exposition from Figueroa to past the Expo/Rodeo split. In the lane closest to the median, they simply removed the white dashed lines and replaced them with double yellow solid lines. There are turn lanes open on major streets, but this could be the beginning of preping for construction traffic control. Yippee!
__________________
"Then each time Fleetwood would be not so much overcome by remorse as bedazzled at having been shown the secret backlands of wealth, and how sooner or later it depended on some act of murder, seldom limited to once."

Against the Day, Thomas Pynchon
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2006, 4:52 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
^ Yes they are starting the preliminary utility and traffic work for it, much like they did for East LA. I believe groundbreaking will start in August, which would be nice as a "birthday gift"
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2006, 7:53 PM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,838
Thats scary. i signed on today with one thing in mind, ask when Expo is starting, and there are two posts on the subject. Damn mind readers. Thats great news, cant wait to see the heavy construction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Jun 8, 2006, 9:34 PM
LongBeachUrbanist's Avatar
LongBeachUrbanist LongBeachUrbanist is offline
Ridin' The Metro
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Metro Blue, Wardlow Stop
Posts: 2,578
^ Just to clarify, the current project plan for Expo is:

pre-construction work, now;
official groundbreaking, this summer;
heavy construction, early 2007.
__________________
COMPLETE THE CENTRAL SUBWAY BY 2020!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2006, 4:18 PM
Wright Concept's Avatar
Wright Concept Wright Concept is offline
I just ran out of B***sht
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 2,338
Orange Line heads toward overcapacity

BY RACHEL URANGA, Staff Writer
LA Daily News

With the Orange Line nearly surpassing its 15-year ridership goals in just seven months, transit experts say the MTA should consider expanding the line and even adopting a light-rail system - sooner rather than later - to meet soaring passenger demand.

Spurred by rising gas prices and a surprisingly strong appetite for public transit, thousands more passengers than anticipated are boarding the 14-mile, $330 million busway each day.

And while the Metropolitan Transportation Authority says it can handle the load, transport experts say a capacity problem looms.

"The system was underbuilt and underfunded," said Nate Brogin, a former chairman of the Valley Industry and Commerce Association's transportation committee. "What we need is to go back and rebuild the system, the correct way - not the cheapest."

A longtime advocate of above- or below-ground transportation, including rail and subterranean busways, he and others say the bus line could reach capacity sooner than the MTA thinks.

But MTA officials say with buses running every three minutes, ridership would have to soar - from close to 22,000 now to 30,000 to 40,000 - before it hit capacity.

"We are not anywhere near (exceeding) capacity of the line," said Gary Spivac, an MTA manager in charge of the San Fernando Valley.

Yet, with gas prices hovering around $3.40 a gallon, the demand could come sooner than the MTA plans, experts warn. Ridership along the busway has followed a steady climb upward, rising 31 percent since opening. The agency has already had to add four buses along the route.

Across the county, the MTA has logged a surge in riders, with rail ridership climbing 18 percent over last year. MTA bus ridership has increased 10 percent in the past 12 months.

Agency officials who spent $270,000 in May to promote "Free yourself, Go Metro" - a bus-over-car campaign - largely pin the jump to gas prices.

"These ridership rates won't go down because the cost of driving is going to continue to go up with the direct cost that commuters pay (in gas) and in time," said Hasan Ikhrata, director of planning and policy for the Southern California Associations of Governments.

"We should have thought about this last year. You are providing good and needed services but you need a much higher level of frequency than you have today."

Ikhrata says buses should be running every 20 seconds rather than every three minutes as they do now. Others take a harder line, calling for a long-term rail project, a notion long dismissed as being too costly.

"Clearly there is a demand here," said Richard Katz, a mayoral appointee to the MTA board and former Assembly member who sat on the transportation committee for more than a decade. "We have to look at what we can do to meet the needs of the riders. I don't want to see people turned off because the buses are too crowded.

"In the long term, we need to look at if we need to switch to light-rail buses."

For much of the 1980s and 1990s, officials and transit advocates wrestled over how to supply the sprawling Valley's growing commuter class with an effective transportation system.

But NIMBY-ism and opposing views that ranged from a monorail over the Ventura Freeway to a subway, forced officials to settle on a much less ambitious busway system that could be built for less money.

Considered the Cadillac of the MTA system, the busway boasts its own landscaping, right-of-way and a bike path. The 57-seat, train-like buses see more riders than the $898 million Gold Line that runs from Pasadena to downtown Los Angeles.

Early surveys of the line showed that 20 percent of the riders were new to public transportation.

"It's a no-brainer," said Richard Petty of North Hollywood, a public transportation convert. "I asked myself, Do I really need to drive to work?"

For three months, the former car commuter has been loyal to the Orange Line. But over that time he's seen an uptick in passengers and now says he avoids the packed buses at the 5 p.m. commuting hour.

An early advocate of the line, MTA board member Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky said the agency should hold off at least 18 months to determine whether ridership will remain steady or plunge if gas prices fall.

But, he adds, the Orange Line's unique pathway allows it to expand with more buses or even into light rail. Already, he said, the MTA is speaking with bus manufacturers about higher-capacity vehicles.

"This is a good problem to have because it's really not a problem. It's a capacity management issue," said Yaroslavsky, an MTA board member and longtime advocate for the Orange Line.

"There is no practical limit to what the Orange Line can handle. It should be encouraging the MTA to promote this approach to public transit elsewhere in the county and in the Valley."

Staff Writer Angie Valencia contributed to this story.

rachel.uranga@dailynews.com

(818) 713-3741


Overgrown oranges
Hey MTA, get cracking on near-capacity busway

LA Daily News

IT'S now become quite pass to marvel at the success of the Orange Line. Since its opening week last fall, the east-west San Fernando Valley busway has set ridership records. Last month, an average of 22,000 people - the size of a small city - rode the Orange Line every day.

And now MTA officials say the line is about to reach its capacity. Apparently, the thirst for the Orange Line was greater than anyone dared to hope.

With gas prices high, the demand on the popular bus line is going to get even heavier. Transportation officials must be prepared, and not merely try to respond once it happens. Whether it will take more buses, larger buses or changing bus schedules, the MTA needs to be planning now for the immediate future of the Orange Line.

But as this faster-than-expected growth illustrates, a plan to get us through the year isn't enough. Rather than throwing the usual crumbs to the Valley after investing in other areas, such as the Westside, the MTA must put a new Valley transportation project on the front burner.
__________________
"Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamp post: for support, not illumination." -Vin Scully
The Opposite of PRO is CON, that fact is clearly seen.
If Progress means moves forward, then what does Congress mean?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2006, 9:35 PM
LosAngelesBeauty's Avatar
LosAngelesBeauty LosAngelesBeauty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,610
The MTA is retarded when it comes to "forecasting" the ridership of any line. Do they honestly think that after opening the Expo Line that the ridership will ONLY be 44,000 boardings a day by 2020??? They've got to be smoking crack.
__________________
DTLA Rising
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2006, 9:36 PM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,838
i think the Expo estimate is 72,000 when the line reaches Santa Monica, and that is definitley on the low end. that number is probably for the segment to Culver City.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:10 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.