LAist: Orange Line to Rail? Subway from Valley to UCLA?

Kymberleigh

Sat, 22 Nov 2008 11:52:36 -0800

@polaroidgirl (and also partially to benh57): What I have heard is that the Sepulveda Pass line would be light rail, using an overhead structure over the median of the 405, but would have to use a short tunnel segment near the top of the hill because the grade on the north side of Mulholland is too steep for light rail to climb, and using a tunnel would allow for a gentler grade coming down into the Valley. I should also point out that light rail is one of the quietest technologies, and is difficult to be heard over freeway traffic (go stand at a Green Line station if you need proof). As for the timeline of the Sepulveda Pass line, I expect that it will be built on a schedule that allows it to open at the same time as (or shortly after) the Purple Line extension to Westwood. In the meantime, there are Metro governance council members for both the San Fernando Valley and Westside/Central sectors who want to create an express bus directly between Van Nuys and Westwood for the interim, and I'm sure both councils would appreciate the public comments in support of same. You should come to a meeting and say so!

Kymberleigh

Sat, 22 Nov 2008 11:43:49 -0800

@chris78: What is the deal with these extremely long term timelines at Metro? It's a standard funding methodology made necessary by the uncertainty of federal and state matching funds for any project. What Metro -- and any other agency that has the responsibility for planning and programming funds for projects -- does is project on the basis of "what funds do we know we have and what can we do if those funds come in on the same schedule as in the past" ... then, if and when additional funding comes, the timeline gets moved up accordingly. Remember that Measure R came with a project list and specific amounts of money allocated over a 30 year period for each project. In order for projects to happen faster, there are several things that need to happen: The new sales tax revenue has to be projected over that 30 year period, a difficult thing to do accurately with today's economy; Projects then need to be prioritized based on a balance between the projected need and how much local funding will be available at any given time; Federal and/or state grants need to be applied for, with the Measure R funding allocated as the required local match; The local match funds need to be bonded against, since they will come in over time but be spent sooner (and in today's financial market, bonds do not sell as quickly as in the past); Engineering and design, award of contract, and construction. Remember also, please, that the Metro Red Line started construction in late 1986, but the first segment (Union Station to Westlake/Mac Arthur Park Station) didn't open until 1993, and the entire route to North Hollywood took until 2000. "Need to happen now" has to be balanced against how long it takes in the real world. It is possible for the first segment of a Wilshire subway extension (to Fairfax, most likely) could be in service by 2017, given all of the required bullet points above and the actual construction time. But not sooner, and not all the way to the Westside in that time.

benh57

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:39:16 -0800

Just out of curiosity, why are you against tunneling under the hills? It would be more direct and would have very little impact. In fact, i'd wager that residents of the hills would prefer a hidden tunnel to a loud, slow light rail train adding yet more noise to the Sepulveda pass. This is not 'big dig' like. That was not built with TBM's, which are very efficient. Don't bring up the earthquake thing, tunnels are actually the safest place to be in an earthquake, since they move 'with' the ground. Above ground is more dangerous since things fall on you, and buildings break.

polaroidgirl

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:24:07 -0800

It's a CAPYBARA! They are semi-aquatic... no tunneling! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capybara :)

Zach Behrens

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:54:44 -0800

The Subway to the Sea could be open in five years, Metro said at a meeting last Winter. But that would require an extraordinary amount of funding upfront.

chris76

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:47:54 -0800

2038. Are f-in kidding me? What is the deal with these extremely long term timelines at Metro? The subway to the sea is planned to open in 2035. 30 years to build this stuff? Give me a break - there is no excuse, these changes need to happen now.

gonzoworm

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:38:18 -0800

I would have thought that someone who uses a gopher as an avatar would be all for tunnels under the sepulveda pass! Must be a tree gopher...but for what it's I think the intent is to serve Westwood and to link 2 major jobs/residential areas with an alternative transport mode (not simply to serve UCLA) a worthy goal, imho.

polaroidgirl

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:25:36 -0800

Screw that. I don't want to pay for the West Coast version of the Big Dig. Do what I did - don't go to UCLA. Pick a different UC and come back to LA when you graduate. But seriously, I'm OK with a dedicated express bus on the 405. Hell, I'm OK with building a freaking monorail down the middle of the 405 but tunneling under the hills? No way. Luckily the folks who live there would never let it go through.

Alexcantsee

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:45:29 -0800

Who cares how! Just fucking do it already!

polaroidgirl

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:37:40 -0800

Van Nuys to UCLA?? How? On the 405? Under Bel Air? Sounds crazy.