GETTING THERE FROM HERE-With all due respect to Times writer Laura Nelson and her editors, the recent article and headline of "Metro Shelves Direct Rail to LAX" offers by far more heat than light, and "dumbs down" the reason why a combined People Mover/Metro Rail scheme is on its way to being supported by the Metro Board:
This was the original Metro Rail/LAX connection plan all along.
So let's keep things real simple--like the article tried to do, but without all the "red meat", if not "yellow journalism", that this article offered readers who deserve the truth.
If you want a much more accurate article that throws light, and not heat, at the topic, then please read former Times journalist and first-rate Metro blogger Steve Hymon's article .
Credit goes to Hymon and to Metro for the photos below--here are the key points.
1) Look at the darned map!
The Harbor Subdivision rail right-of-way, formerly owned by rail conglomerate BNSF and now owned by Metro, was always the route that the Green Line was supposed to take in its approach to LAX...but it's about 1-2 miles east of the airport terminals.
The Crenshaw/LAX Light Rail Line, which just broke ground, is the orange/green dotted line below and is meant to provide a north/south link between the east-west Expo Line in the north and the east-west Green Line in the south.
Among the reasons that myself and others once favored the direct dig-under-the airport approach, and now support the People Mover connection to the terminals, is that the alternative to this direct north-south approach costs another $2 billion and years of grief with utilities and environmental surprises one can only imagine we'd discover by digging under an airfield.
It's not just the Federal Aviation Administration that doesn't like us digging under runways, and possibly affecting airline operations and safety--think of the time and money we'll save by avoiding an unwise and unnecessary "Big Dig".
Imagine if we veered west from the Harbor Subdivision rail right-of-way, with a direct stop under LAX in the central terminals:
Imagine if we had two stops. Even more elaborate, but think of how expensive and time-consuming this would be underground. Possibly up to $3-4 billion...and remember that either of these options is not mutually exclusive to the direct north-south connection to the east.
In other words, lots of money, and lots of complicated alternating train routes. Convenient? Hardly!
But thanks are truly owed to Metro for being as comprehensive and thoughtful as any group of engineers and planners ever could be.
The alternative below is being moved forward, but on first glance it appears rather complicated, fraught with the "some trains going to LAX and others not" problem, and it does appear that the direct link of Metro to LAX and the LAX People Mover are rather redundant--we have two lines doing the same thing. It might work, but it does appear unnecessarily expensive and operationally difficult.
So please, everybody, look at the map--it'll explain why this "no-brainer" of a solution is anything but!
2) The Crenshaw and Green Lines are combining into a north/south line, but a connecting link to LAX needs an east/west line
Have you noticed that the Crenshaw/LAX Line, despite its title, moves Metro Rail closer to LAX, but moves in the wrong direction to REALLY get it TO the actual LAX terminals?
Getting "Metro Rail to LAX" via the Crenshaw/LAX Light Rail Line involves a compromise by riders making a north-south commute past LAX, as well as by riders going to/from LAX.
How do we please both groups of commuters? The answer is to split the difference with the "LAX Connect" Plan being promoted by Mayor Garcetti and CD11 Councilmember Mike Bonin, and by LA World Airports.
This westward swerve might slightly inconvenience those not wanting to go to LAX, but it's a huge betterment to establish ideal ridership of the Crenshaw/LAX Light Rail Line, and makes its title actually mean something.
This concept of "LAX Connect" doesn't provide the "direct link" of Metro Rail to the central airline terminals, but imagine checking in your luggage when you got off the Metro Rail, and then connecting to your terminal via an Automated People Mover--effectively, the "direct link" to LAX would be redefined to the Intermodal Transportation Facility (ITF) which is the centerpiece of this plan, and the way things are done in airports throughout the globe.
3) The currently-proposed Crenshaw/Aviation station link is still too nebulous (and it's not Metro's fault!)
There are a lot of moving parts to this plan, and much of it is that we still do NOT know how and where the Consolidated Rental Car Facility, proposed at Century/Aviation, will be configured.
So while the Century/Aviation station at Metro is still on the drawing board as a People Mover linkage (see below), it would be done in a vacuum that ignores all the other necessary linkages to the rest of the to-be-defined projects at Century/Aviation. It would be the equivalent of "the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing".
Until we know what will be configured at all four corners of Century/Aviation, it's best to adhere to the diagram above, and figure out how the eastern portion of the People Mover (dotted blue line above) will coordinate with other projects at Century/Aviation.
Besides, do we really want to ask Westsiders to go east to Century/Aviation, and then double back west to connect to the airline terminals?
4) Metro trains can't handle the volume and 24-7 passenger traffic, but a People Mover can!
An Automated People Mover can handle about 2-3 times more passengers, and with 2-3 times more trains than a directly-linked Metro Rail Light Rail train (imagine every 2-5 minutes, not every 10-15 minutes).
Furthermore, Metro trains don't operate as frequently, if at all, during the midnight hours that many workers and commuters to/from LAX would require in order to access the central airline terminals.
Again, this was the originally-planned Metro Rail connection to LAX...that always HAD a connecting Automated People Mover. Yet LAX Connect is arguably better and more flexible than the original plans shelved in the 1990's.
5) This will be necessary not only for Metro Rail users, but bus-using and automobile commuters as well, to easily access LAX...and is the best option for tourists and regional employment alike!
The ITF is to be connected to the I-405 freeway, as well as to a series of roads in the adjacent region, in order for cars and buses to have a choice of accessing the ITF or the central airline terminals, thereby extending and dispersing the traffic over a wide region instead of creating a congestion nightmare for those accessing the airport by any mode of transportation.
Furthermore, this is very convenient to foreign and domestic travelers, who are increasingly part of the 21st century economy of Los Angeles.
The LAX Connect plan, or something very much like it, would change LAX into one of the best and most user-friendly airports in the world.
Add to that the huge and profitable business district east of LAX created by a combined People Mover and Metro Rail linkage, and you've got Los Angeles moving towards being one of the best and most user-friendly economies in the world.
And that's not idiotic at all, is it?
(Ken Alpern is a Westside Village Zone Director and Boardmember of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC), previously co-chaired its Planning and Outreach Committees, and currently is Co-Chair of its MVCC Transportation/Infrastructure Committee. He is co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and chairs the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at [email protected] This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. . He also co-chairs the grassroots Friends of the Green Line at www.fogl.us . The views expressed in this article are solely those of Mr. Alpern)
-cw
CityWatch
Vol 12 Issue 8
Pub: Jan 28, 2014
