Comments on: More Metro Meetings Coming Up: Gold Line Eastside Extension Phase II

By: BOB2

BOB2 — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 17:07:35 +0000

Going down the 60 corridor is ridiculous. It is a politically forced alternative to support the dubous transit village project in El Monte Which has been a questionable project, propped up with political funding, made even more questionable by recent controversy. An east LA Gold Line extension needs to go where there are actually potential riders, and there are virtually zero in the 60 corridor. Term limits may help to bring real planning decisions, rather than developer driven political decisions into this process.

By: JDRCRASHER

JDRCRASHER — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 17:11:42 +0000

I think we should have a “fork”, one leg being the Washington Blvd to Whittier alignment, and the other the SR-60 freeway alignment.

While Whittier is important, people are forgetting that just a little further down the 60 freeway is Ed Roski’s planned multi-billion dollar traffic-generating football stadium. Because of typical politics, it seems increasingly likely that it will get built. Yes, there IS a Metrolink station for the City of Industry, but the problem is that it’s several blocks away from the site, making it virtually useless.

We have to think smart, people…

By: Joel

Joel — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 22:36:47 +0000

Interurbans, perhaps you should add your proposed route to the map, I’m having some trouble picturing it myself.

By: calwatch

calwatch — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 05:38:15 +0000

Poor accessibility, noise, and safety concerns are all issues. Part of this would be ameliorated by having the Gold Line on an elevated track to the south or north of the 60 freeway, not in the middle (which is their current plan, to avoid having to rebuild all the interchanges). But the 60 freeway route is incompatible with the street running nature of the Gold Line, and studies have shown it provides the least bang for the buck, but is politically easiest since there are no businesses to annoy. I would use the Washington or Whittier Boulevard routes myself, since Whittier is a major city in LA County that is poorly served by both transit and the freeway system.

By: David Galvan

David Galvan — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 05:15:11 +0000

What’s wrong with a freeway aligned route like the Green Line?

By: bzcat

bzcat — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 22:57:01 +0000

The southern extension of Gold line makes a lot more sense than the northern Foothill sprawl extension. I think the Whittier to Atlantic segment will see plenty of ridership. The 60 freeway route is a non-starter… we don’t need another Green line.

By: Dan Wentzel

Dan Wentzel — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 22:31:53 +0000

Interurbans,

I recommend you check out John Von Kerczek’s “Ditch the Car, Take the Metro” blog.

http://www.takethemetro.blogspot.com/

Many of us recognize that the Gold Lines are at least as much about development as it is about transportation.

The Gold Line extensions are politically inevitable. I’m of the minority opinion that it is better to work with them to politically leverage more resources for other part of the County than to fight them. That’s just me.

By: Interurbans

Interurbans — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 21:09:19 +0000

Does extending the Gold Line any distance east really make good sense? It will already take over 40 minutes to get to Atlantic. Who will want an hour plus ride in city streets to get to work, downtown shopping, entertainment in downtown or Hollywood etc? A shorter northern route through a populated area, not along the freeway could work. Keep the total ride to not much more than an houre or the ridership will be limited. But for a line to Whittier or east the Union Pacific Slauson corridor along Randolph goes through a much denser heavily populated area than any of the planned slow in street routs now under consideration. This corridor from the Blue Line Slauson Station along Randolph to Whittier and east would make for a much faster trip to downtown and serve many more people. Let’s get this corridor on the map and move away from the planned slow in street routes now under consideration.

By: Dan W.

Dan W. — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:57:20 +0000

Maximizing Metrolink in the eastern and northern parts of the county doesn’t sound very sexy as nothing “new” is being built, but it is a very important part of Southern California’s transportation future.

The challenge as I understand is the need to share these rail lines with the ever-greater demands of freight travel from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

I would hope that the San Gabriel Valley politicians clamoring for both Gold Line extensions also work for more Metrolink service and improvement Foothill Transit bus service to connect it all.

By: Ken Alpern

Ken Alpern — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:04:08 +0000

Perhaps by default, but the SR-60 route appears to be the best for the time being. I like the idea of having a southern fork descend to Washington in the future, but unless there’s a LOT of grade separation it doesn’t appear to be an attractive option for commuters who want to move longer distances than a normal bus ride would take.

Increasing Metrolink service from Orange County to Union Station might help I-5 alternative traffic flow more than any Eastside extension to Whittier (unless, as aforementioned, the whole darn thing was virtually grade-separated).