Inglewood is looking to build an automated tram to link the Crenshaw Line—a Metro train that’s set to open in 2019—with the city’s growing list of major attractions.
The people mover would run for 2 miles, connecting downtown Inglewood, the under-construction NFL stadium and the neighborhood set to rise next to it, the Forum, and the arena that the Clippers might build.
The route would be from Market Street (where the Crenshaw Line’s downtown Inglewood station will be located) to Manchester Avenue, then down Prairie Avenue to Century Boulevard, the Daily Breeze reports. A one-way trip would take 13 minutes.
The elevated people mover would help residents and visitors access more public transportation options and “complete the first/last mile connection from the Regional Metro Rail system to the City’s major activity centers,” says the city’s website for the project.
There is no funding source yet for the project, but officials are considering forming “an Enhanced Infrastructure Finance District to use property tax increment money on the project,” says the Breeze.
The project website features a report that estimates the cost of the people mover along Prairie could be as much as $746 million for construction, then up to $17 million a year for operational costs.
“There is neither a deadline for implementation or determination as to whether it will be implemented as feasibility has to be determined,” Inglewood city manager Artie Fields said in a statement.
A final environmental impact report for the Inglewood people mover project is expected in 2019.
Nearby, LAX is getting its own automated people mover that will also hook up with the Crenshaw Line at the 96th Street station. (The Green Line will also link to the people mover at that location.)
- Inglewood explores building a people mover from Metro’s Crenshaw line to NFL stadium, The Forum [Daily Breeze]
- Envision Inglewood [Official site]
- Inglewood residents sue to block Clippers arena [Curbed LA]
Comments
If "tram" means "gondola" I’m all for if, but let the NFL pay for it.
By YCHTARS on 07.17.18 8:50pm
Of sorts. It’s proposed to be elevated. Have the NFL pay for half of it and pay for half of the yearly operating costs since it’s mainly going to benefit their stadium complex for the first several years.
By mrxman on 07.18.18 2:01pm
The NFL will be pay nothing since the NFL doesn’t pay for anything in any of its markets.
The Rams’ owner would be the one to ask but he won’t pay for it either since he doesn’t care about the traffic.
By I Like Buildings on 07.19.18 1:52pm
The owners are the NFL. This particular owner would be smart to help get this done. It will only benefit his development. Having the stadium and surrounding development be readily accessible via a people mover will only make his investment more valuable.
By mrxman on 07.20.18 4:44pm
Hope it dont take Mayor Butts as long to build as it’s taking to finish construction on Century East and West of Crenshaw!! Good job buddy for the people that live around that area keep up the horrible working habits…
By Beachwood Dude on 07.18.18 10:49am
How are construction delays the Mayor’s fault?
By SC310 on 07.19.18 1:07pm
How about they do the smart thing and have the train go TO the new stadium/giant mixed use complex so people will actually take the train there.
By LADude on 07.18.18 11:27am
This.
Having the brand new station located 15 blocks away from the sparkling new stadium basically encapsulates the LA Metro as a whole.
So close, and yet…
By Chateau d'RB on 07.18.18 11:50am
So LA Metro should have a time machine?
The Crenshaw line was in planning from 1993-2009 and construction was started in 2010. The stadium didn’t start planning until 2015, with the Rams owner deliberately avoiding building his stadium near a metro station so he could maximize parking revenue.
By RXBXUXNX on 07.18.18 1:09pm
Groundbreaking on the Crenshaw line was January 2014, and they announced the new stadium in January 2015 and it was still possible for them to reroute the line as they were considering it (according to articles on Curbed LA). Since this will impact the future of the region and can only be done once, they should have redesigned the line and run it past the new complex.
By LADude on 07.18.18 2:08pm
Bruh, the environmental impact report was completed all the way back in 2011. If they decided to reroute the line to attend to the stadium it would have required redoing an assessment for the new changes, and when you hire a contracting company to build stations, they aren’t usually fond of you putting that contract on hold to redesign everything. And that doesn’t even account for Metro now having to acquiring build rights to new land, potentially displacing more local homes and businesses.
But hell, of course they could have. And you would inevitably be on here complaining about how Metro constantly just wastes taxpayer money with costly delays and mistakes.
Nothing is ever easy, and there will always be concessions. My personal pet peeve is when people see things as straight up black and white when a child could look and see a obvious gradient of gray.
By beowulfey on 07.19.18 6:47am
Yeah, I’m not blaming Metro for this or anything.
It’s just so…typical.
By Chateau d'RB on 07.22.18 4:12pm
Why should Metro pay for a station and line extension that will mainly benefit a private business operation that didn’t even exist 2 years ago? Doing a people mover paid for by local residents and businesses makes much more sense and is fairer.
By mrxman on 07.18.18 2:04pm
Mainly benefit a private business? You do realize this is an entire complex with shopping, offices and thousands of residences? You mean the tens of thousands of tax paying workers and residents who will use this?
By LADude on 07.18.18 2:10pm
The entire complex is privately owned and being privately developed including the shopping, offices, and residences. It’s up to Inglewood to get this done, not L.A. L.A. is already supplying the Metro station where this newly proposed People Mover will be connected from.
By mrxman on 07.20.18 4:48pm
I don’t understand how mass transit wasn’t a condition of the original approvals for the project. How are they just getting around to this NOW?
By lhooqdesign on 07.18.18 11:38am
It’s the other way around. Private property owners can’t dictate where public transportation is built. It is the Metro board – including Garcetti and Bonin – who should have modified the Crenshaw line to have it pass though the new complex. But since Garcetti and Bonin are involved, you know they will make a bad decision.
By LADude on 07.18.18 1:05pm
So you are saying that 6 years into construction of the Crenshaw line, when about 40% of the funds had already been expended, Metro should have just stopped work, abandoned half the line they had spent decades planning, and rerouted to serve a multi-billionare’s playhouse?
I’m sure the federal government which provided loans for the project would gladly forgive them just so the line could spend another decade in planning and reconstruction to reach the stadium.
By RXBXUXNX on 07.18.18 1:12pm
The Notice to Proceed was issued in September 2013 and groundbreaking in January 2014. So not sure where you are getting that construction started in 2012?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crenshaw/LAX_Line
By LADude on 07.18.18 2:13pm
The Federal loan to fund the project was awarded in October 2010 with construction activities like utility relocation starting in 2012
By RXBXUXNX on 07.18.18 3:27pm
This NTP means Metro alread spent about years developing the route, acquiring land rights, designing, coordinating, and completing the construction drawings, getting permit, approvals, etc. By Sept 2013, everyone was already paid for the completed milestones. While it’s techincally possible to reroute before the groundbreaking, the losses would outweigh the benefits. Probably would have to defund other projects (if they can even move funds that easily).
By Opal Blue on 07.19.18 8:54pm
The Rams and Chargers weren’t even in the picture let alone the actual location of the stadium when construction had already started on the Crenshaw line and contracts awarded and funded.
By mrxman on 07.18.18 2:08pm
The stadium was approved by the City of Inglewood. They apparently know what is best for their backyards.
By RXBXUXNX on 07.18.18 1:10pm
The stadium is in Inglewood, not L.A. It’s up to that city to address that issue and that is what they are doing now. It’s obvious that the city didn’t want to chase away the development by putting too many onerous demands on the project initially. They are playing it right.
By mrxman on 07.18.18 2:06pm
But the stadium is a regional attraction with regional impact. Inglewood can propose and pay for a system which suits Inglewood, but wouldn’t it be smarter for the Inglewood and the County of Los Angeles to partner on a system to maximize linkage to the larger area? It’s great that it connects more or less at a Crenshaw Line stop, but is the plan presented ideal?
I’d be curious to see if there are other ideas that might make it even more useful.
By surfnspy on 07.19.18 8:00am