There is a long term plan to extend the C line to Santa Monica, though I don't think they plan to start construction on that extension until the 2060s. The Sepulveda line is supposed to reach the airport sometime before that.
Both would certainly feel lie the type of thing you'd expect in a futuristic and much better version of the network. Both would also be parallel to Crenshaw north! By then I'd hope the D line actually makes it to the sea!
Great write up. I’m with you on highlighting the positive though indeed $1 billion for a surface station is ludicrous. As it happens (no pun intended to CBC) I flew into LAX Friday evening, and the transit buses from the terminals horseshoe to the new Station looked reasonably patronized.
Myself, I did not use the Station, preferring to use the LAX FlyAway bus direct non-stop to Union Station (every 30 mins, $12.50) and from there the A line train to Pasadena. Using Metro from the LAX station would have involved one or two changes, depending on route. But I was also concerned about any potential curfew-related disruptions to downtown metro stations.
In any case, factoring in the time waiting for the bus and on the bus (and importantly the fact this was evening and well past rush hour) versus the transit bus and the Metro ride, the bus probably still came out a better option. Thirty minutes. But factoring in notorious rush hour traffic, when a trip from Union to LAX or vice versa can easily take 50 minutes or longer, taking Metro would be more competitive to Union Station.
Maybe this will boost ridership on the C (ex Green) line, for a long time the least used and most unloved of the lines (and also whose stations in the middle of the 105 freeway are not particularly pleasant) given the direct connection to the A line.
If California politicians were politically courageous, they could toll the existing state and county expressways (such as the 134, 60, state managed portions of the 110 and 210, etc) in LA to raise additional funding for transit. The then-conservative leadership in OC built a number of tolled expressways, so clearly there is precedent.
I agree, getting more riders on the C line would be a great outcome. They need to get on with extending it east, because all those places have a direct trip to the LAX zone!
I'm generally OK with transferring from a people mover to a bus/metro/train, as long as it's free. Not all airports can fit a train station within a terminal horseshoe.
As a resident of NJ, what I really hate though, and what I hope LAX avoids, is the stupid $8.50 fare gate between AirTrain JFK/EWR and the subway/NJT. I get it, the money was needed to fund system construction back in the day, but that was well over 20 years ago.
At least the Port Authority is finally breaking ground on pedestrian/road access to EWR station. Talk about design flaws - who in their right mind at NJT and the Port Authority thought that EWR and Secaucus stations should only ever be transfer stations with no road access? This is why I tend to agree with what you said on the livestream, about Canada having nothing to learn from US rail design.
There is a long term plan to extend the C line to Santa Monica, though I don't think they plan to start construction on that extension until the 2060s. The Sepulveda line is supposed to reach the airport sometime before that.
Both would certainly feel lie the type of thing you'd expect in a futuristic and much better version of the network. Both would also be parallel to Crenshaw north! By then I'd hope the D line actually makes it to the sea!
Great write up. I’m with you on highlighting the positive though indeed $1 billion for a surface station is ludicrous. As it happens (no pun intended to CBC) I flew into LAX Friday evening, and the transit buses from the terminals horseshoe to the new Station looked reasonably patronized.
Myself, I did not use the Station, preferring to use the LAX FlyAway bus direct non-stop to Union Station (every 30 mins, $12.50) and from there the A line train to Pasadena. Using Metro from the LAX station would have involved one or two changes, depending on route. But I was also concerned about any potential curfew-related disruptions to downtown metro stations.
In any case, factoring in the time waiting for the bus and on the bus (and importantly the fact this was evening and well past rush hour) versus the transit bus and the Metro ride, the bus probably still came out a better option. Thirty minutes. But factoring in notorious rush hour traffic, when a trip from Union to LAX or vice versa can easily take 50 minutes or longer, taking Metro would be more competitive to Union Station.
Maybe this will boost ridership on the C (ex Green) line, for a long time the least used and most unloved of the lines (and also whose stations in the middle of the 105 freeway are not particularly pleasant) given the direct connection to the A line.
If California politicians were politically courageous, they could toll the existing state and county expressways (such as the 134, 60, state managed portions of the 110 and 210, etc) in LA to raise additional funding for transit. The then-conservative leadership in OC built a number of tolled expressways, so clearly there is precedent.
I agree, getting more riders on the C line would be a great outcome. They need to get on with extending it east, because all those places have a direct trip to the LAX zone!
Hi, can you please make a "Montreal metro/transit wish list"?
I'm generally OK with transferring from a people mover to a bus/metro/train, as long as it's free. Not all airports can fit a train station within a terminal horseshoe.
As a resident of NJ, what I really hate though, and what I hope LAX avoids, is the stupid $8.50 fare gate between AirTrain JFK/EWR and the subway/NJT. I get it, the money was needed to fund system construction back in the day, but that was well over 20 years ago.
At least the Port Authority is finally breaking ground on pedestrian/road access to EWR station. Talk about design flaws - who in their right mind at NJT and the Port Authority thought that EWR and Secaucus stations should only ever be transfer stations with no road access? This is why I tend to agree with what you said on the livestream, about Canada having nothing to learn from US rail design.