Metro Westside Expansion Meeting

I attended one of the five community meetings that are being held to gauge public opinion of what (if any) additional metro service should be planned for the west side. I did not stand up and voice my opinion but i plan to craft a letter that I will be sending that will voice my opinions.

Overall the meeting seemed productive - this is the first Metro meeting i've been able to attend and they seemed legitimately interested in getting public opinion about transit options in the area. The presentation was fairly straightforward and reinforced all the signs they had posted around the room. They addressed what exact phase this project is in, possible outcomes, possible alignments a project would have and what the next steps would be. They stressed many times that Nov. 1st is the cut off date for public opinion in order to look into what the "locally preferred alternative" is. I urge everyone to let Metro know what you think about LA Transit and the traffic on the west side here

The first thing that caught my attention was the potential alignments poster. They showed the obvious alignment down wilshire but also an alignment that goes from Hollywood/Highland down Santa Monica and continues down Wilshire to the Ocean.

I think both of these alignments would add value to Los Angeles but I think the Wilshire branch would be the most beneficial. A few people from neighborhood councils expressed concern with building a subway through their "historical" neighborhoods. One commenter was very against building a station at Wilshire/Crenshaw because of the ridiculous Park Mile designation that has kept any retail out of the area - it hasn't kept large office buildings out of the area though and multiple 6-8 story office buildings line wilshire that could be served by that station - not to mention connecting to Crenshaw transit options.

The comment that got to me the most was by a gentleman who claimed Los Angeles is a horizontal city and doesn't have any need for a subway - he ranted about how much a subway costs compared to other options. It's that kind of narrow thinking that keeps Los Angeles stuck in traffic all day. Los Angeles may have been a horizontal city in the past but look at any major artery in the city and all you see is 10+ story buildings going up.

There were lots and lots of interesting stats about the west side including job growth and population growth. It made it hard to imagine any alternative other than building a subway to help with the problem.

If i was planning this route I would look at a combo subway/light rail project. Build a tunnel under Wilshire from Wilshire/Western to the UCLA/405 area. At that point the trains emerge from a tunnel and run along a surface alignment through the residential and less dense areas around Santa Monica. I don't know enough to know if it would save that much money to make the train above ground for that last portion through Santa Monica but it seems like a good solution that has been achieved in many other transit systems (MBTA in Boston and MUNI in San Francisco to name a few)

After the Wilshire line is created - or at least approved - then we can start talking about a major north/south alignment. I had no idea why no one is talking about a line down Sepulveda along the 405. And how about extending the crenshaw line up to hollywood to connect at hollywood/vine or hollywood/highland.

• Additional coverage of this meeting can be found on Metro Rider - more in depth analysis of the comments and attendance.

• Also of note is that the LA Times had a reporter there writing down lots of notes. I'm sure we can expect to see a piece in the paper this week.

**thanks to Elissa for the use of her camera for the above photos**