RSS
June 18, 2008
Gold Vs. Purple: Advocates Choose Their Trains
Gold Line Photo by Fred Camino/MetroRiderLA and Metro Subway photo by Kwasi B.
Next week, the Metro board will vote on two very important issues. One will put a half-cent sales tax increase, that would raise funds for public transit, on November's ballot. The other is the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), a document guiding public transit in Los Angeles County for years to come.
Gold Line advocates, who wish to see the line extend from Pasadena to Azusa (then Montclair, then Ontario International Airport), are asking the board to move the eastwardly extension from the unfunded to the funded portion of the LRTP, according to the LA Times' Road Sage, Steve Hymon. If that happens, they would get an $80 million boost to the $400 million project. San Gabriel Valley officials say they can take care of the rest.
But the problem comes with the half-cent sales tax increase. If Gold Line gurus don't get what they want, they threaten (in hint form) to advocate for residents to vote down the increase on the November ballot (because, after all, what do they get? Butterfly effects may not be enough). And that constituency base could ultimately fail the measure, affecting transportation funding throughout the region, including the Westside extension (the Purple Line's 'Subway to the Sea' plan).
Then the question comes about funding the Purple Line's proposed extension to the Westside, which Metro has been pushing aggressively (even with their first venture into leveraging action with Facebook). And how will Westsiders and Angelenos gather around Metro funding a line that is known to not carry that many passengers when Wilshire Blvd. is one of the most congested streets in the country? Besides the Lakers (cause they can't), can gold and purple coexist?
| 
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
[ report this ]
Well, I just read your "butterfly effect" article... which is absolutely true. The "unfortunate" nature of the "three cities" the Purple Line would affect is that it also travels through some of the most densely populated areas residentially and commercially. A tangential tax (0.005) helps everyone out by easing one of the busiest corridors in Los Angeles, Santa Monica, and Beverly Hills directly and then, as you stated in the previous article, everyone else tangentially. I'm sure most of us have been stuck on Wilshire near the 405 for an hour. In a bus or our cars. While the 720/920 rapid routes are usually great, there's just some road-blocks they can't pass. Imagine how traffic on the 405 would be if all of those people weren't trying to get on it? Or if those people who wanted on, could get on it, but all the people just trying to PASS BY it, could.
Anyway, is there no room for BOTH projects on the plan? Seems to me the Gold Liners aren't asking for much, at least compared to a billion dollar subway line... And Metro is asking for a small tax which rakes in a billion a year for twenty years.... there has to be something for everyone in that, no?
[ report this ]
Although I take the Gold (+ Red) every day to work from East Hollywood to East Pasadena, we need the Purple that much more desperately, especially with the whole Pico/Olympic one-way thing, the Westside has more traffic -- both ways ass opposed to the SGV, which is generally one-way -- and thus is in more need of solutions.
Of course, building a heavy rail subway takes longer than an LRT line. So fund and start building the Purple Line ASAP, then fund and build the Gold Line Foothill later on. You'll probably see both open around the same time.
[ report this ]
I live in OC and am jealous of the fact that the MTA has any rail projects planned. I find it ridiculous that in a county of 3 million people, that is apparently the second most densely populated in the state, we have no plans for light rail, subway or any other mass transit other than some stupid BRT that will not effectively increase transit use or reduce commute times! Build both lines LA!
[ report this ]
I immediately thought of the Lakers upon reading the headline for the post.
But really, the Purple line is extension is desperately needed (as if it hasn't been emphasized enough)!
Not only will it help those who grueling have to drive on the 10 East after work, or spend almost an hour just getting the 405 on Wilshire or Santa Monica from Santa Monica, it will benefit all those who want to come to the Westside/Santa Monica/Beverly Hills/WeHo for leisure! Parking is so bad (expensive and difficult to find); the Purple line "Subway to the Sea" would make these journeys more pleasant for everyone!
[ report this ]
Has the loss to Boston divided us so badly that Purple and Gold are no longer in harmony? Purple AND Gold make us great!
Lakers 2009.
(laughter is the best medicine, I guess)
[ report this ]
Nobody rides the Purple Line because it hardly goes anywhere except from downtown to Wilshire/Western. I live in Park La Brea, and if the Purple Line came by where I live and went all the way to Santa Monica, I would definately use it. (Esp. with the added Pink Line Santa Monica Bl. proposal.) I think a better predictor of how popular the line would be is how packed the 720 buses that go down Wilshire are. If you are coming from the Westside toward downtown, it doesn't exactly make sense to get off the bus to transfer to the train depending on how far out you're headed. The Purple Line would eliminate the need for the 720/920, and those buses could be diverted toward other routes, esp. North/South routes, which can be sometimes infrequent or not run even at least every half hour during late night hours.
[ report this ]
It's not really right to say that these lines are in opposition.
I think the more accurate way to put it would be: transit enthusiasts and transit experts are very suspicious of the value and potential consequences of the gold line. Both can be built, but the purple line is clearly more valuable and the gold line may just further escalate urban sprawl.
If the gold line guys want to hold the purple line hostage, fine, but the metro board needs to make sure that they get those officials totally on board for the sales tax hike then. For instance, why not tie the gold line money into the sales tax money so that they have to work to pass it?
[ report this ]
Gold Line advocates are also threatening congestion pricing if they don't get their way on the Gold Line extension. There may be too much at stake not to give them their way...it will be interesting to see what the Metro Board eventually does.
[ report this ]
Gold Line ends in the middle of no where, an extension would get you to the Covina Ikea. Everyone knows that you need a car when you go to Ikea.
[ report this ]
I don't think that Metro board has any leverage:
http://wikicapital.org/wiki/Leverage