The Wilshire Subway: Oh, Say, Can You Sea? (Source: Citywatch)

Link: CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall

The Wilshire Subway: Oh, Say, Can You Sea?
MOVING LA
By Ken Alpern

Whether the Subway to the Sea will ever reach the Sea, or whether students from UC can travel the future Purple Line to the Sea, or whether we’ll ever be able to see the Sea from wherever the Subway reaches its sea-most terminus is still an unanswered question…you see. I give lots of props to Subway/Purple Line Metro staff like David Mieger and Jody Litvak, who have worked tirelessly on this and other projects for years, so my critique on where the currently-proposed terminus west of the 405 isn’t so much a slam on their work as much as it is a reminder that we’re putting the proverbial cart way too far ahead of the horse…or, perhaps, the railcar ahead of the tracks.

(Please contact David Mieger or Jody Litvak at WestsideExtension@metro.netThis email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it for all of your comments and/or questions—they’re first-rate at gathering and evaluating input)

The Westside Subway (of which the Wilshire Blvd. segment is called the Purple Line) will be built in Minimal Operating Segments that are functional extensions that are individual “chapters” in the completion of this line. Each segment will likely take years for the funding, design and construction to occur.

The first MOS (MOS-1) is roughly to Fairfax/La Cienega, MOS-2 is from Fairfax/La Cienega to Century City, MOS-3 is from Century City to somewhere just west of the 405 freeway and includes Westwood, MOS-4 is from the 405 freeway to the beach, and MOS-5 is the popular connecting segment between the Red and Purple Lines down Santa Monica and Fairfax.


A project as huge as the Wilshire Subway is just too darn big and expensive to do it all at once—which is probably a good thing, because as this project moves further west the uncertainty regarding station and routing details increase, and resident/political consensus becomes more elusive.

For this very reason, I’ve heard different folks describe which MOS should be MOS-4 or MOS-5, because the need to extend this line to the beach doesn’t at all enjoy as much support and consensus as does the need to connect the Red and Purple Lines…and the question has been frequently asked as to whether the money to bring the Purple Line all the way from the 405 freeway to the beach isn’t better spent on expanding the budget to create a connecting rail line from the San Fernando Valley to the Westside and maybe to LAX.

Nobody really knows much about that “405 Line” between the Valley and the Westside, either. Ask ten folks for ideas and you’ll get ten different ideas—should it be above or below ground, should it be alongside the 405 or bore underground to come up in the Valley at Van Nuys Blvd., should it be light or heavy rail, etc.?

I am entirely baffled as to the entire lack of organized grassroots support for such a “405 rail line” despite the innumerable individuals who’ve raised the idea as one that remains overdue and unresolved. Perhaps when the Expo and Purple Lines become realities instead of science fiction will such a “405 rail line” project be taken more seriously…but it will compete for dollars and planning with a Purple Line that goes all the way to the beach.

At this time, the Purple Line Subway appears to be on its way to meeting several key goals, such as suggesting the best future connections to the future Crenshaw Light Rail Line at La Brea or thereabouts, to Century City and to the Beverly Center and to Westwood.

The Purple Line planning effort does NOT, however, at this time address the traffic crunch on Wilshire Blvd. that starts west of the freeway and makes it a nightmare to traverse one side of the 405 to the other. At this time, for financial, logistic and other purposes the western terminus of MOS-3 (to Westwood/405 freeway) is favored to be at the Westwood/VA Hospital.

Traffic is monstrous well to the west of the hospital, however, and issues such as parking and access to federal property are HUGE and make this a much thornier problem to resolve than most of us realize (memba’ getting the Green Line to LAX and working with those fun-loving feds?). Any station at the VA Hospital will (rightfully) serve primarily the needs of the patients and workers there…but not the needs of the general public.

Unfortunately, a proposed compromise of having the western terminus of MOS-3 at/near the western edge of the VA property at Federal (near Barrington) is not proceeding forward; the hospital continues to be the favored western terminus.

Meanwhile, huge commuter/pedestrian destinations on Barrington and Bundy exist to the west, as does the aforementioned 405 freeway-clustered traffic. Bundy was the original western terminus of MOS-3, but has now been relegated to MOS-4 to Santa Monica and the beach at a time when there are no shortage of individuals wondering if we need this Purple Line to go all the way to the beach.

So…why would Wilshire Blvd. commuters jump on board the Purple Line Subway if they’ve already fought through most of the traffic to get to the 405 freeway?

Might we consider including Wilshire/Bundy as the western terminus of MOS-3, and cancel MOS-4 for now since Santa Monica will get its Expo Line and other priorities of connecting the Valley and the Westside via the “405 rail line” and the Red-Purple Line connection (MOS-5) also exist?

Most importantly, with the understanding that we have no idea of if, how or where the 405 rail line will connect to UCLA and the Purple Line, why are we committing so far in advance to the VA vs. Barrington vs. Bundy?

The Wilshire Subway might not get the political and budgetary blessings to move further west than a Fairfax/La Cienega Blvd. Extension by 2015-18. However, it packs a much greater ridership, planning and economic punch if it can be built in a longer first-phase to Century City by that time.

That still gives us lots of time to talk with the folks at Metro, the VA and with both the political and grassroots entities of West Los Angeles, the San Fernando Valley and Santa Monica to figure out what we want west of the 405 freeway.

I look forward to what reasonable folks who really want this line can achieve with long-term visioning while more immediate extensions to Century City and Westwood can be prioritized.

And, on a final note…

…between cancelling classes and raising student tuitions, it might behoove UCLA to finally lead a visioning process of the once and future 405 rail line as well as the Purple Line effort. How and where will its station(s) be, and what kind of Westside and Valley links fit the need of UCLA students, workers and faculties, to say nothing of Valley/Westside commuters in general.

As I see it, the Subway to the Sea needs to be seen as a sea change for how we see comprehensive rail networking and urban planning for the seaside neighborhoods of West LA and Santa Monica.

And as for the UC that should oversee this Subway to the Sea…I grade it as best a “C”.

(Ken Alpern is a Boardmember of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC) and is both co-chair of the MVCC Transportation/Infrastructure Committee and past co-chair of the MVCC Planning/Land Use Management Committee. He is co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and also chairs the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at Alpern@MarVista.org.This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it The views expressed in this article are solely those of Mr. Alpern.) -cw

CityWatch
Vol 8 Issue 4
Pub: Jan 15, 2010

High-Speed Rail Must Go Into Transbay Site: State

Link. Please click here.

Updated 2:37 PM PST, Fri, Jan 8, 2010

The attorney general's office has stepped into the lovers' tiff between the Transbay Joint Powers Authority and the California High-Speed Rail Authority over where the high-speed train's going to terminate here.

After weeks — no, months — of confusion, the deputy attorney general wrote in a letter that the "Transbay Terminal must be part of the high speed rail system."

So said the voters after all, when they filled in the yes bubble on Prop 1A in 2008. Clarity!

Only problem now is, the legislation didn't define exactly where the Transbay Terminal would be.

Meaning, if all sense doesn't flee this earth and the Transbay Transit Center stays where it's planned at 1st and Mission, perhaps there's still room for one of the alternatives the high-speed rail authority's seeking: that Beale Street wing perpendicular to the transit center.

That's kind of good news for people who thought the fast train was actually in danger of never making it to the Transbay Transit Center, but cold consolation for Rincon Hill residents who are still living "under the cloud of demolition."
 

First Published: Jan 8, 2010 10:11 AM PST

Whittier officials to lobby for Gold Line expansion (Source: KPCC)

Link: Whittier officials to lobby for Gold Line expansion | 89.3 KPCC

Whittier officials to lobby for Gold Line expansion
Praytino/Flickr
Jan. 10, 2010 | KPCC Wire Services | KPCC

Officials in Whittier hope to use grass-root pressure and an existing Metro ridership study to campaign for the Gold Line to be extended there, instead of along the Pomona (60) Freeway, it was reported today.

The Whittier Daily News quotes Whittier city council members as saying they are confidant mass rail transit will be extended from East Los Angeles through Whittier, instead of a more-northly alignment to the El Monte area.

Last week, five small cities along the 60 Freeway banded together to lobby for the light rail train to parallel the 60 into Montebello, Rosemead and South El Monte. Those municipalities plan to hire an outside planner to campaign for the northern route at a cost of about $65,000.

To the south, Whittier officials point out they do not have a direct freeway connection to Los Angeles, and the light rail service will provide a connection to L.A. that the five cities already enjoy. Whittier also points to a Metro study that favors the southern alternative, which would lay rails down Washington Boulevard from East Los Angeles to Whittier's Presbyterian Intercommunity Hospital.

The two possible alignments are being considered for the U-shaped Gold Line, which already runs from Sierra Madre east to Pasadena, southwest to Los Angeles Union Station, then southwest through Boyle Heights to the East Los Angeles community center. That route is already approved to be extended from Sierra Madre to Pomona and eventually Ontario.

Both Gold Line prongs will likely be connected to the Expo Line to Culver City and the Blue Line to Long Beach, via a regional connector set of tracks across the Los Angeles Civic Center, now under design.

Complicating the matter is the California High Speed Rail project, which plans to build new bullet train tracks from Union Station to Pomona in the next 10 years, possibly along the routes now under consideration for light rail trains.

Los Angeles MTA's Leahy charge to change region's transit landscape

Link: Los Angeles MTA's Leahy charge to change region's transit landscape

Los Angeles MTA's Leahy charge to change region's transit landscape

by Angela Cotey, associate editor

Art Leahy remembers when passenger-rail service didn't exist in Los Angeles County, when L.A.'s Union Station was all but abandoned and downtown emptied out at 5 p.m. It was the early 1970s, and Leahy was a bus driver for the Southern California Rapid Transit District, a predecessor to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA).

But during the past 30 years, and especially the past 15, downtown L.A. has undergone a major revival. New and renovated high-rise buildings now are filled with apartments, condos and lofts. A slew of new restaurants and bars, as well as movie theaters and performing arts centers, keep the city active well into the night, says Leahy, who now serves as LACMTA's chief executive officer.

"It's become a mature, urbanized area," he says.

L.A.'s transit system has matured right along with it. In 1990, LACMTA opened its first rail line — the Blue Line, a light-rail corridor running between 7th Street in downtown L.A. and a Transit Mall station. The agency since has expanded its network of light-rail and subway lines to total 79 miles. The most recent addition? The six-mile Metro Gold Line Eastside extension, which opened Nov. 15, 2009. The line connects downtown L.A. with Pasadena, Little Tokyo, Boyle Heights and East Los Angeles.

Advisory Committee for Gold Line Eastside Extension Meets Next Thursdayj (Source: Streetsblog Los Angeles)

Link: Streetsblog Los Angeles » Advisory Committee for Gold Line Eastside Extension Meets Next Thursday

Advisory Committee for Gold Line Eastside Extension Meets Next Thursday

by Dana Gabbard on January 6, 2010


There have been a fair number of folks making comments on this site and elsewhere on the internet about the recently opened Gold Line Eastside Extension and safety. This coming week the advisory committee that provides input to Metro on such issues is holding a meeting near the Indiana Street station (Alma is the next street east of Indiana, and the School is midway between 1st and 3rd Streets) in the evening. Certainly worth checking out if you want to share such comments directly .

Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension Review Advisory Committee
Thursday
Jan. 14, 2010
6 p.m.-8 p.m.
Ramona Opportunity High School
231 S. Alma Ave.
Los Angeles CA

Concerns raised as Expo Rail construction continues (Source: Daily Trojan)

Link: Concerns raised as Expo Rail construction continues | Daily Trojan

Concerns raised as Expo Rail construction continues

By Laura Cueva · Daily Trojan

Posted Today at 2:51 am (7 hours ago) in News

Progress on the Expo Line — a rail line that will run down Exposition Boulevard and around the USC campus — continues to chug along, but recent developments may cause traffic congestion in some areas and unrest among citizens in others.

The final version of the project’s Environmental Impact Report was recently released, outlining the possible impacts of extending passenger train service throughout the area. The report noted several overpasses that residents desired near schools could not be built, leaving many residents upset.

The rail line will pass near Dorsey High School and Foshay Learning Center, where at-level street crossing will be built as opposed to aerial overpasses. Concerns have been and continue to be raised about the safety of the crossings, especially in areas with high numbers of children.

“Our basic objection is that the line is being built at street level, and that’s a danger,” said Damien Goodmon, coordinator of the Fix Expo Rail Campaign.

Expo Line project officials and MTA policies, however, said the street and pedestrian crossings are safe and will not be congested.

Beyond safety concerns, the project has faced budgeting and scheduling hurdles from its inception.

“This region needs rail transit,” Goodmon said. “But it does not need it built cheaply and inadequately.”

But Gabriela Collins of the Expo Line project said many of the concerns have arisen from project enhancements that were not part of the original plan. She said the main goal is simply to finish the project.

“We’ve been responsive to concerns,” Collins said. “Our focus is to work to complete construction in a timely fashion and provide an alternative to the 10 freeway, which is highly congested.”

The issues with scheduling — the project was originally set to be finished earlier than is now planned — have been brought to California Public Utilities Commissioner Timothy Simon, who said in an open letter that expediting the project is a major concern.

“You can be assured that I am fully aware of the legitimate public need for a speedy resolution,” Simon wrote. “In this regard, I have asked all of our staff to expedite this process. I consider this of the highest priority.”

The project is currently in Phase 2, which encompasses certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and outlines an extension and certification of the rail line from Culver City to Santa Monica.

The heavy construction that can be seen around USC is part of the first phase of the Expo Line project, which consists of building the Expo Line from Culver City to Downtown Los Angeles and includes building stations alongside USC on Flower Street at 23rd Street and Jefferson Boulevard and on Exposition at USC and Expo Park.

The rail will go underground just past Jefferson at Figueroa Street and Exposition, Collins said. Now, stations are being built at Jefferson and Hoover Street as well as on Vermont Avenue and Exposition.

Though there is no specific timeline for the construction, Collins said most of it should be completed over the course of the next year.

The rail line will run parallel to the Santa Monica Freeway, one of Los Angeles’ most congested freeways. Other stations will include Vermont, Western, Crenshaw, La Brea and La Cienega, some of the busiest streets in L.A.

Once complete, the rail will allow USC students and others easier access to all areas of Los Angeles.

“The fact that those stations are being built will provide people with easier access to the Galen Center, the Coliseum, the science center and museums without having to look or pay for parking,” Collins said.

According to the Expo Rail Line website, the rail from Culver City to Downtown L.A. via USC will be running by 2012, while the project as a whole is scheduled for completion by 2016.

L.A. needs a long-term plan (Source: LA Times)

L.A. needs a long-term plan - latimes.com

Editorial
L.A. needs a long-term plan
The poorly managed city needs a road map for the future for land use, for its government workforce and for finances.

January 11, 2010

Los Angeles, the city -- not L.A. the megalopolis or the culture or the state of mind, but Los Angeles, the incorporated municipality -- seems perpetually unable to figure out what it is, what it should be and where it is going. Civic boosters clamor for a place on the world stage and call for sweeping programs to enhance its glamour. What, after all, is the point of being such a large city if its clout and spotlight can't be put to use to make a positive mark on history? Yet many residents, especially those who have spent most of their lives here, often want simply to be left alone, and want their government to keep them safe and hold wrenching change at bay without raising their costs of living. What's the point, after all, of moving here and investing in a home if the quality of life and the opportunities are going to be no different than they were in the crowded, expensive cities they left?

Those who aspire to civic greatness and those who aspire to backyard barbecues have this in common: They seem perpetually disappointed in Los Angeles. Each blames the other for the wrong vision, but the source of their discontent is probably something more prosaic. Los Angeles, the municipality, is poorly managed.

Over the coming weeks, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the City Council will begin grappling with ideas to keep ahead of a lingering $400-million structural deficit. Already tossed about for months have been ideas such as jettisoning the zoo, the convention center and parking garages. By all means, if it makes sense for the city to let them go, it should.

But the mayor and the council shouldn't mistake hacking off city departments for a long-term strategic plan for management and growth. It is such a plan -- a workable one, not just a stump speech -- that Los Angeles lacks. We need a road map for the future for land use, for spending, for the city's workforce and for finances. We need to make backup plans (if we can't afford recreation programs, for example, who can provide them?) and to ask hard questions (what happens if we simply eliminate recreation programs?).

Such strategizing doesn't come naturally to most politicians, and there's no shame in that, as long as they recognize their shortcomings and call for support. There is expertise in-house, if only city management -- the elected officials -- would listen. If not, maybe before contracting out the parking meters, they ought to contract out for some long-term thinking.

Our leaders do understand priorities. Villaraigosa has put public safety first, and contrary to any expectation, it has been his most stunning success. That forms the groundwork both for residents who want to be left in peace and dreamers who want to achieve civic greatness. If he (and the council) can get on with the more mundane, but urgent, matter of managing City Hall, perhaps he can again focus on the aspirations and excitement that made voters turn to him in the first place.

Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times

When The Streetcars Return

Link: When The Streetcars Return | Los Angeles Metblogs

When The Streetcars Return
By Jason Burns
January 5th, 2010 @ 4:47 PM Downtown, History, Mass Transit
redcars

On the Left: An old streetcar from the Pacific Electric Railway, On the Right: A new streetcar from Washington, D.C.

If all goes according to plan, streetcars will return to Downtown Los Angeles in four years. But, what will they look like?

I’ve argued before that they should be historic replicas of the Red and Yellow Cars that used to traverse this city when it boasted the largest street railway system in the world. I championed a streetcar that would complement the architecture of our city’s Historic Core instead of mimicking trains you would find in Portland or Seattle or Whereverville. One that says Los Angeles.

That is most likely not going to happen. But, what about a compromise?

The new D.C. streetcars were just unveiled this past December. They already bear a slight resemblance of Big Red. Perhaps L.A.’s newest streetcar could at least pay homage to the past with a clever paint scheme.

L.A. seeks federal loan to speed Measure R projects

Link: L.A. seeks federal loan to speed Measure R projects - LA Daily News

L.A. seeks federal loan to speed Measure R projects
Daily News
Updated: 01/05/2010 07:36:42 PM PST

Los Angeles city officials filed a request with the federal government Tuesday to borrow money to speed up plans for the "Subway to the Sea" and other transit projects planned under Measure R.

The City Council asked that the proposed National Infrastructure Development Bank, to be created under legislation now pending in Congress, advance money to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority to speed up Measure R projects.

Measure R was approved by Los Angeles County voters last year, adding a half-percent sales tax to fund transit projects.

"The people of Los Angeles County put their money where their mouth is to pay for transit," Councilman Bill Rosendahl said. "And, quite frankly, I don't want to have to wait 30 years to see these projects come to life."

Deputy Mayor Jaime de la Vega said the Mayor's Office has been working with federal officials on the proposal, which would allow the construction to begin more quickly.

"There are 12 major projects that we believe will provide over 127,000 construction jobs and 2,800 permanent jobs minimum," de la Vega said.

Finding the Rail Line Bucks to Get LA to LAX in 2010 Moving LA

Link: CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall

Finding the Rail Line Bucks to Get LA to LAX in 2010
Moving LA
By Ken Alpern

Yep, there’s a lot of bad news with respect to our City’s budgetary and operational nightmares—and this website is often where you’ll hear it first—but it’s only fair (and accurate) to talk about the good news when it occurs. This good news is that our Mayor, love him or hate him, is serious about getting a rail connection to LAX. Deputy Mayor Diego Alvarez has left Mayor Villaraigosa's office to become regional transportation coordinator for Los Angeles World Airports, and Mr. Alvarez will be assigned to getting a rail line to LAX as well as getting the Foothill Gold Line to connect to Ontario Airport (both LAX and Ontario Airports are owned and operated by LA World Airports and the City of Los Angeles)--so clearly, the Mayor has this in mind as well.

And so does a host of City, county, state and federal electeds from the Westside and the San Gabriel Valley. Bill Rosendahl, Ted Lieu, Jenny Oropeza, Don Knabe, Jane Harman, Maxine Waters, David Dreier, Adam Schiff, Mike Antonovich and the good folks of South Bay, Eastside, San Gabriel Valley and San Bernardino officials are also in that camp.

In fact, much of the animosity of the South Bay and San Gabriel Valley made for strange bedfellows when the previous battle lines over Measure R funding and federal funding of rail and freeway projects were drawn up before Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas stepped in and raised the bar to include all portions of the county.

Creating and/or enhancing commercial hubs or corridors on Wilshire Blvd., the San Gabriel Valley, Downtown and the LAX region need not be mutually exclusive, and creating multiple hubs takes the overdevelopment heat away from residents in any one given area.

But they need funding—they need EIR’s, and just as Metro funded EIR’s for the Crenshaw Corridor Project, Wilshire Subway, Harbor Subdivision Rail Corridor, Downtown Connector and Eastside Light Rail Extension, the need to find some $5 million to fund the EIR to link the Green Line to LAX is in order at a time when all Measure R funds are tied up in the myriad of road, rail and freeway projects now under way throughout the County.

Manchester Square (at Century/Aviation, just to the east of LAX) might just be one of those future hot spots of commercial real estate and an economic sparkplug to the entire region, where the future Green Line and Crenshaw Line and LAX People Mover trains will all converge to provide one of the most job-creating transit-oriented developments in the nation. $5 million would be a small price to pay to ensure that LAX is a billion dollar income creator for the region like our ports are.

Green Line and Automated LAX People Mover would trains whisk hotel and job-bound commuters along the Century Blvd. Corridor to enhance economic development that rivals current and future venues of the Wilshire Blvd. Corridor and Downtown Los Angeles. Similarly, the Downtown Light Rail Connector, Downtown Streetcar Trolley Network and Wilshire Subway (with an accompanying Busway) are all ways to establish a vibrant City and County of Los Angeles for the 21st Century.

The Green Line to LAX is included in the planned projects funded by Measure R, but it’s in the timeline behind Expo, Crenshaw, Wilshire, Downtown Connector and Foothill Gold Line projects. It’s a relatively small project, but one that is a great addition to the Crenshaw Corridor Project, as that project now revs up, to ensure that Westside inclusion in an airport/rail network, with accompanying Century Corridor hotels and businesses creates the most jobs for the region.

Furthermore—and perhaps most critical about the timing of the Green Line to LAX project—is that it ensures that a comprehensive plan to link the Green Line to Century/Aviation and on to LAX Parking Lot C at the southeast corner of Lincoln and Sepulveda is included with all the other rail links at Century/Aviation (i.e., the Crenshaw Corridor and LAX People Mover lines).

If we build only the Crenshaw Corridor now, then the Green Line and LAX People Mover will have to work around any preexisting plan at Century/Aviation in the years to come. Imagine building your home from scratch…one room at a time instead of building all the bedrooms, bathrooms, kitchen, etc. in the usual comprehensive manner.

Enter the Green Line Interagency Task Force, to whom I will be forever grateful to Bill Rosendahl and the CD11 office for establishing shortly after Councilmember Rosendahl was elected. Among the list of maps/plans the task force (comprised of representatives and planners from LAWA, Metro, the FAA and LADOT) explored is the one below:




What the final LAX reconstruction looks like after the economic downturn resolves is anyone’s guess, but the above map is as good a rough guess as any. Note how the map includes all three rail lines—three, count ‘em, three, to ensure that Westside, Downtown, and South Bay/Southeast L.A. County access to/from LAX is ensured via the key convergence at Century/Aviation.

With the passage of the Crenshaw Light Rail Line EIR in 2009, however, the time to revisit a plan for the LAX Automated People Mover, Green Line to Sepulveda/Lincoln and other on-hold features of LAX Reconfiguration is needed in 2010, and the time to fund any needed EIR’s is now…unless, of course, you want those LAX-connecting rail lines to be built by 2020, as Measure R anticipates, and not by 2015 or so.

How do we fund the $5 million or so to get that EIR under way now?

Well, it’s not shovel ready but federal funds (including as yet unspent stimulus money) can and should be considered. I don’t like pork barrel projects, but put this in front of the American taxpayer (who’s seeing airport/rail connections being built all over the world), and I suspect it’ll make some sense.

Other federal sources include airport and transportation-related federal, state and local departments. With the Crenshaw Corridor Project funding the FAA-mandated trench along the incoming flight paths east of the runways, the Green Line to LAX Parking Lot C is rather small and virtually entirely on airport property, so the FAA can and should be considered as a source for funding (depending on the legality of the request, and under what circumstances it’s proposed).

This old Transit Coalition map illustrates the airport-related nexus to present to the FAA for consideration of federal assistance on this project:

Airport parking, taxi and even airlines fees can also be considered—yes, air flight costs are up, but $1-5 user fees per ride to specifically create the LAX People Mover and study the Green Line to LAX makes a lot of sense to commuters so long as the funding is transparent and closely supervised. The City Council and Mayor should take advantage of the fact that the City owns and operates LAX and can vote on such user fees.

Furthermore, Citywide parking fees and developer fees (like say, from Playa Vista) would do well to be appropriated to such worthy causes as airport/rail connections that truly have the ability to reduce car traffic to LAX.

This is $5 million, not $5 billion, we’re talking about here. The future funding of the Green Line to LAX is included in Measure R funds, but we need to ask ourselves whether we’re too tied up in other rail projects to build the full airport connection NOW that the Crenshaw Corridor Project just won’t do. It’s within our grasp.

If Rosendahl, Villaraigosa and our other City leaders are willing to assign and empower Diego Alvarez to fund and plan this major project, then they will have a more pleasant, and uplifting endeavor to focus their attention on between budget cuts and union battles…and it’ll give the rest of a bit of hope for our City that the 21st Century will bring happier times for residents, commuters and the economy in the years ahead.

(Ken Alpern is a Boardmember of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC) and is both co-chair of the MVCC Transportation/Infrastructure Committee and past co-chair of the MVCC Planning Committee. He is co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and also chairs the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at Alpern@MarVista.org.This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it The views expressed in this article are solely those of Mr. Alpern.)