Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim
No. The point of the Crenshaw Line is the bigger picture of a North-South rail line for the Westside. The significant value of the Crenshaw Line is when it goes north towards Pico, Olympic, Wilshire, West Hollywood and Hollywood. The rail line has to start somewhere and $1.7 billion will cover the trunk of the line. North of Expo, this Line will most likely be underground the entire way up to Hollywood/Highland via West Hollywood. So it's a real valuable transit line when completed.
Did you know that freeways started in the middle of nowhere and then expanded into urban areas? You get the trunk of the line done first and then you build into the mass. I may not agree with the formula, but that's how its done. You get the demand to build (i.e. SGV now loves the Gold Line, when previously, you had NOBLAG and other groups try to prevent the Gold Line through South Pasadena).
Not picking a fight but this leaves a few questions unexplained. Why would you link South Bay to the only part of central LA that is not a business hub? First you would link to DT or Century City or Beverly Hills, or Beverly Center or Westwood or SM. But instead of building on the 405 or up Vermont, they chose a low-usage, no highrise, no density corridor. Traffic moves easily on Crenshaw even at rush hours and there are buses that are not overly crowded. And as mentioned, it doesn't hit the airport or major employers in the South Bay, except in the sense that employers could get shuttle buses to go to the stops IF there were anyone on the trains that worked there.
I don't think anyone doubts that this was political, just like the Foothill Extension. And, like it or not, boondoggles are used by opponents to beat on proponents of legitimate, valuable projects.
The Gold Line is doing OK (not as well as I and many others had hope), but it is hardly comparable since it actually goes to central Pasadena, which is a significant employer, shopping and entertainment center.