Crenshaw Line's Battle Plans Presented for Measure R Fun

The Bus Bench: Crenshaw Line's Battle Plans Presented for Measure R Fund

Crenshaw Line's Battle Plans Presented for Measure R Fund

Crenshaw Transit Corridor_study_map The battle is underway for the Measure R funds that are coveted in these times of California state financial failure. Metro CEO Art Leahy and Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas presented an update of the $1.7 billion MTA Crenshaw Transit Corridor Study on Thursday, August 27. The public will be invited to comment on the project in late September and early October, and the Metro Board will hold a vote on October 22 to decide which of two options Metro will choose—providing there is an option to be chosen.

The two primary transit options presented for the Crenshaw transit path. One would be the Light Rail Transit, or LRT; the other would be the Bus Rapid Transit option. Both present opportunities as well as challenges. Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, whose Second District neighborhoods would benefit greatly from having the Crenshaw Transit Corridor Project, made clear his endorsement for the LRT option.

The LRT option would have a light rail train running from the Green Line to the Expo Line. The travel time between the two LRT terminals would be 20 minutes. The transitway would assume a number of different forms as it pass along, under and over other thoroughfares, with the anticipation of eventually extending it to Wilshire Blvd. The estimated capital cost would be $1.3-1.8 billion.

The BRT option would be considerably more complicated, with some exclusive lanes as it traveled a greater distance (Metro Green Line's Aviation Station to Wilshire/Western, where the Purple Line currently extends to its western terminus). The time for the segment between the Green and Expo Lines would be at least 28-30 minutes; higher motor traffic would extend travel time. The travel time for the segment between the Expo and Purple Lines would be approximately 40 minutes. The estimated capital cost would be $500-600 million.

Many factors have been studied regarding the two options: ridership, base project cost, travel time, construction jobs, economic development and future motor vehicle traffic congestion. The historically under-served area would, according to Ridley-Thomas, benefit in construction jobs as well as in future commerce and housing. Were the BRT alternative chosen, an estimated 3500 construction jobs would be created; the LRT alternative would bring an estimated 7800 jobs to the area. Commerce would be positively affected once the the transitway was completed, and housing would possibly benefit in higher values owing to the desirability to be near a popular transit option. The 405, which has for many years been recognized as being the largest parking lot in the world, might have some relief. Best of all, the LRT would prompt a serious look at getting the Green Line connected to LAX—an oversight of enormous proportions that has been a debacle for well over a decade.

However, the figures and facts may hold little influence in the race to secure a project that will bring billions to those communities chose to have Metro projects fulfilled. Although the Eastside Extension of the Gold Line is projected to be running before the end of 2009, there is a study to examine extending it to South El Monte or Whittier. The Orange Line is being extended north four miles to Chatsworth Metrolink Station and the Purple Line is being studied to examine extending it to the west side of L.A. In downtown there is a study to investigate the possibility of a regional connector between the Gold and Blue Lines. The Expo Line, while still controversial owing to the neighborhoods through which the at-grade and underground portions are being built, is slated to open in mid-2010. For nearly all these projects and studies, Measure R is the only significant source of funding owing to the severe state and federal budget cuts and constraints made of late. Public transit is not the only aspect of Los Angeles transit seeking funding; there are many agencies involved in road repair and more that seek the same funds.

The larger capital cost of the LRT should not be the primary factor in considering the option. There will be twice as many more construction jobs as the BRT as well as a transit option that will reduce congestion, bring revenue to an area that is shovel-ready to be further developed and help increase real estate in a time of a national fiscal crisis that no one can portend will soon be resolved. Time is also a cost to be considered; the LRT option will save a great amount of time for commuters over the bus"way" option of the BRT. Fewer motor vehicles will cut pollution in an area long over-wrought with vast industry, which will in turn find benefits in lower health care costs and greater job production.

With a few large transit projects nearing completion and several studies underway for future projects, there is only so much funding to be spread round. While certain areas have had chances in the past to have a light rail line, only to scotch them for reasons that are now deemed ridiculous, other areas have never had a chance and have managed to do relatively well. Perhaps it should be the communities that are desiring a first chance, communities that have long wished to be a part of greater Los Angeles, communities that have brought themselves up by their boot-straps, be granted the chance that other communities were offered but refused.

-BusTard