To see the full image, click here.

This above map was an attachment to an initial review of connecting the West Hollywood Transit Corridor to the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor via San Vicente, and possibly going south all the way to Long Beach (or San Pedro). The next step would be a full study of this corridor, of which the Santa Monica Blvd./Beverly Center portion has already been studied as part of the Westside Subway extension project. Metro has stated that while it did not recommend the West Hollywood corridor as part of the Westside Subway Extension project at this time, that the West Hollywood corridor has high potential as a transit corridor and a light-rail subway might be more competitive for federal funding, as reported here.

West Hollywood voted for Measure R more than any other city in Los Angeles and this is a very pro-transit area with lots of “YIMBYs”.

While the map shows both a La Brea alignment and this Santa Monica / San Vicente alignment, it is really a no brainer. The La Brea alignment would miss all the ridership generators further west, and the San Vicente / Santa Monica alignment would make it easier to get to the Beverly Center, Cedar Sinai, the City of West Hollywood, the Grove/Farmer’s Market and even the Sunset Strip.

Interestingly enough, there have been a couple of recent blog posts bashing the City of West Hollywood over development projects approved in expectation of an eventual subway through the city.

Patrick Range McDonald continues his anti-subway rants at the now anti-subway LA Weekly.

Former City Councilman Steve Martin, possibly looking for an issue to mount an attempt at a political comeback, rags on the City Council on the WeHo news website. That he singles out Lindsey Horvath might mean he thinks she is the vulnerable incumbent he can beat. (I wouldn’t bet on the ex-councilman winning.)

Both articles seek to berate the City Council for approving development projects before a subway was approved, as if development wouldn’t continue to take place if there weren’t a West Hollywood subway. Their focus is on traffic, as if traffic wouldn’t get worse anyway without a subway. Mass transit does not reduce traffic as much as it provides alternatives to having to drive in traffic.

I don’t take the LA Weekly seriously as this once-good rag now is no longer a progressive alternative news source and now takes an anti-subway posture. Martin’s article shows that even in a city that supported Measure R by 86%, there are still a handful of NIMBYs here as there are everywhere that care first and foremost about their automobiles, and politicians will be willing to pander to them.

Personally, I look forward to the LaBrea/Santa Monica development as will many residents of West Hollywood who will now be able to walk to the cinema. If I were running for City Council, and this is not an announcement by any means, I would say I envision a West Hollywood that is designed for the people who live, work and play here, not the motorists who simply drive through here on the way to/from somewhere else. I’d advocate continuing to support building some form of subway through West Hollywood, but in the meantime building transit-only lanes on Santa Monica Blvd., where new modern streetcars may run along with buses, possibly with the support of the City of Los Angeles and Beverly Hills (using that right-of-way), allowing a transit way between Century City, West Hollywood, Hollywood, Sunset Junction, Silver Lake, Echo Park and Downtown. I would state in my campaign platform that we can no longer and should no longer socially engineer West Hollywood or anywhere else in the area for automobiles. Of course, that would doom my candidacy, but I would say it and mean it.

As we all move forward in Southern California, we will all need to ask ourselves, what kind of cities do we want? Are they ones that puts cars as our highest priority or one that puts liveable streets as our priority?

In either case, I believe that the Westside Subway Corridor Extension Study has captured the imagination of West Hollywood, and the 86% support for Measure R indicates there is strong support for some kind of Metrorail project in the West Hollywood corridor, as development will continue upward here and throughout Southern California.

The review map above indicates an alignment that is a long way from being any kind of done deal. If we can get a Hollywood-WestHollywood-SanVicente-Crenshaw-LAX-SouthBay-LongBeach light rail line studied, in the Long Range Transportation Plan, approved and built, which are all big IFs of course, I think we should rejoice and take it.

I will continue blogging about the West Hollywood Transit Corridor as events unfold on my blog, Ride the Pink Line.

If Downtowners want to see a Regional Connector Station at 5th and Flower, they're going to have to find the money themselves. Photo:Clovis Bouhier/PBase

Here’s a quick rundown of the major votes by today’s Metro Board. Each of these five motions were discussed at Streetsblog over the last couple of weeks, and links to those stories can be found at the end of each summary.  Streetsblog will have links to all news reports on today’s meeting tomorrow.

Westside Subway Locally Preferred Alternative/Environmental Studies
As expected, the Metro Board of Directors unanimously voted to approve the Westside Subway “Locally Preferred Alternative” as the 9 1/2-mile route to the Veteran’s Administration Hospital in Brentwood from the current end of the Purple Line at Wilshire/Western in Koreatown.  Despite over an hour of public comment from the Beverly Hills’ NUMBY’s, there was no decision made on whether the subway should have a stop on Santa Monica Boulevard in Century City or Constellation Avenue.

Yaroslavsky’s motion, which seemed to place the concerns of Beverly Hills regarding the Constellation Avenue/Santa Monica Boulevard debate ahead of those of other communities, was amended by the author to urge the staff to provide a detailed account of the impacts of both alternatives through the Westside.  This would have happened regardless under the Final Environmental Impact Statement that the Board approved funding for today.  For background on this motion, read yesterday’s Streetsblog story or an update on today’s vote from LA_Now.

Regional Connector Locally Preferred Alternative/Environmental Studies
The Metro Board also approved the “Locally Preferred Alternative” and funding for the environmental studies needed for the Regional Connector.  The debate was dominated by Little Tokyo business groups concerned that “cut and cover” subway construction would disrupt the community and cost them business. Downtown interests and LA City Councilwoman Jan Perry also expressed concerns about the exclusion of the 5th and Flower stop from the LPA.  The Board narrowly voted to exclude the 5th and Flower for now, but left the door open to include it in the environmental studies, if local businesses raise the roughly $2 million needed for that part of the study.  For more background, read this story at Streetsblog or an update on today’s vote from Blog Downtown.

“BikeWood” Hub at Hollywood and Vine
The motion allowing the creation of a street level, highly visible Bike Hub a the Hollywood and Vine Transit Oriented Development passed without much discussion.  Streetsblog provided the background for this motion on Monday.

Ridley-Thomas Grade-Crossing Motion

Good use of everyone's time, Supervisors. Photo: Los Angeles County

The Metro Board quickly passed County Superviser Mark Ridley-Thomas’ controversial grade crossing motion that appeared to introduce a more “subjective” tone into the analysis of whether light rail should run at-grade or grade-separated at major street crossings.  Board Member O’Conner asked that the motion be tabled for a month so Board Members could have more time to analyze the motion.  But, after Metro staff argued that the motion was just a re-emphasis on community concerns from the current grade-crossing policy and that it would have no impact on how these decisions are actually reached, the Board voted to accept Ridley-Thomas’ motion.

During a public discussion segment, Southern California Transit Advocates’ policy director, Kymberleigh Richards, warned that the changes would lead to “days of public comment” over controversial crossings when communities felt their concerns weren’t being addressed.  We’ll have to wait and see if that prediction holds true once debate on specifics of the Crenshaw Line reach the Board in 2011.  For background on this motion, click here.

710 Tunnel Cost Estimate
Ha!  Najarian was listening to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, siting his “wisdom” as a reason to get a new cost estimate.  The official estimate was based on figures from 2006.  While Najarian was able to read his motion into the record, the motion won’t have a full hearing until the next Board Meeting.  For background on this motion, click here.

Not every transportation reform project needs to bring visionary change to a city to be a good project.  Case in point, the beutficiation project recently started on Sunset Boulevard in West Hollywood.  Instead of just repaving the road, as is done so often on the streets of Los Angeles, West Hollywood is taking the extra step to also plant trees, fix the sidewalks and improve the crosswalks.  In West Hollywood, a repaving is a reason to re-examine whether or not to re-imagine a street.

So what are West Hollwood's plans for Sunset Boulevard?  According to the project's website:

Despite the length of time since the Sunset Strip has received any serious roadway improvement, the road is basically in good structural condition. Construction will start on January 4, 2010. The Sunset Strip Beautification Project will include the following improvements:

• Pavement resurfacing;
• Replacing damaged sidewalks;
• Improving roadway and crosswalk markings;
• Upgrading traffic signal equipment; and
• Planting street trees.

More importantly than just the improvements that are taking place are the reasons behind them.  West Hollywood has made no secret of the fact that the city hopes the project will re-enliven and bolster the local economy.  Instead of focusing on subsidizing parking through more on-street parking, West Hollywood recognizes that people visit restaurants and shops along attractive boulevards.  Their cars are just a method to get there and don't need to be catered to individually as much as the actual people do.

Now it's time for a confession.  i've never walked the Sunset Strip before yesterday.  As I wandered down the street, I noticed the work crews out surveying the street and that the asphalt was covered with red and white writings and symbols; but I also noticed that despite the wide sidewalks, the area isn't a great one to walk through.  On the plus side, the sidewalks were wide and there were plenty of crosswalks.  The road also featured plenty of nice shops and restarants.  In short, it was the kinds of place that you would love to visit. 

On the other hand, there was so much traffic that it was difficult to hold a conversation.  Hopefully the trees and decorations that are part of the project will be more than just decorative.  A traffic calming impact, and a sound barrier for the shoppers and eaters they are hoping to attract are in the mix as well.

The total cost of the project is $5.4 million.  Over 20% of the project will be reimbursed from American Recovery and Reinvestment aka "Stimulus" funds.  For more details on the project, read the official fact sheet.

Last night over 60 residents of West Hollywood and other Westside Cities congregated to give Metro feedback on its Draft Long Term Master Plan. Among the attendees were two West Hollywood City Council Members, Mayor Pro Tempore Jeffery Prang, and a staff member representing the local Assemblyman, Mike Feuer.

The 20 people that testified were near unanimous in supporting more rail for L.A. County. There was also strong support for a Subway to the Sea alignment that runs along Santa Monica Boulevard. There was one audience member, an Angeleno that lives in Park-LaBrea, who argued that more money needs to be spent on improving the bus system because subway expansion is a losing proposition. 

Despite the disparity in funding priorities in the long range plan, people were more interested in seeing better bikeways and sidewalks connecting people to transit and centers of place than they were in seeing more highway and roadway capacity. There was one member of the audience who testified that his car was a private sanctuary where he can have meetings on his blue tooth while commuting, but an informal count shows that more people called for increased bicycle and pedestrian spaces to benefit communities than argued for increased roadway space for their Mobile Sanctuary Offices.

Congestion pricing was also a hot issue. Mayor Pro Tempore Prang opened the meeting by calling on Metro to explore Public-Private-Partnerships to fund future projects instead of charging people more money to support transit expansion. However, the handful of audience members that mentioned congestion pricing were supportive.

Former London resident Kevin Burton testified towards the end of the meeting that despite initial public protest, including opposition from Prime Minister Tony Blair, London’s congestion pricing plan is working brilliantly. Today even the cab drivers are supporters. Burton argued that for a congestion pricing plan to work, the revenue generated must be put right into transit expansion.

The budget for the Imagine Campaign must be enormous. At the sign-in table, buttons, postcards, CD-ROM’s and booklets all promoted the Draft Long Term Plan. Instead of the standard slide show presentation, we were treated to a 15 minute film explaining the plan. The film had a disconnect with those in attendance. Nearly half the film was promoting the time savings for highway travelers because of the plan, but not one person who testified in favor of wider highways.

Metro claims that if they have the funding to build all of the planned projects, including the $46 billion in highway construction, that freeway speeds will increase by 15%. That number is highly suspect. Just earlier this week, the Times reported that highway widenings don’t seem to be having any impacts on congestion in Costa Mesa.

However, if tonight’s audience is at all representative of the testimony heard at other meetings, perhaps Metro will reconsider it’s plan to sink just over 30% of its budget into highway capacity expansion and recommit that money to the transit and other alternative transportation projects that will really make a difference to L.A. County.

The next hearing is tonight at 6:30 P.M. at Metro Headquarters, next to Union Station.

Photo: Damien Newton