Results for “josef van der kar”

@guest #43: The ridership generator is the Van Nuys corridor itself with 27,000 current ridership boardings/day. The ridership generator is all of the people coming from warner center on the Orangeline. The ridership generator is the CA High Speed Rail connection at Sylmar. The ridership generator comes from the 2 different metrolink line stations on the antelope valley and ventura lines that will connect these far-flung areas to the westside jobs at under 15 min from the stop. All this coming from one side of the hill… not to mention what is on the other side.

All of these connections will make the corridor in more demand than even say… the red line

By not having a station at Van Nuys/Sepulveda, you would be missing out on a key intersection… but at the same time, I’m sure the cost of of routing the line over to that one station would be prohibitive. I for one would rather see the theoretical money go to extending the line as far north or south as possible and seeing improvements/greater frequency to Line 780.

Line 780 (which is Universal Red Line Station to Warner Center, via Ventura Boulevard) already runs less than ten minutes apart during peak hours. Bringing that number down to say 5 minute headways and maybe even bus lanes down Ventura (from Van Nuys to at least Reseda) would be MAJOR improvements for Valley commuters and would convince more people to get out of their cars.

@Trey: Sepulveda/Ventura has a higher employment density than Van Nuys/Ventura, and one of the highest employment densities in the Valley. (Warner Center is higher) By your logic, it doesn’t make sense to have a Century City Purple Line stop because the line has to detour off the Wilshire alignment to get there.

@Trey:
Correction. The goal is to get over the hill, WITH AS MANY PEOPLE, as possible. Recent studies show that mass transit usage correlates much more highly to the number of jobs in the vicinity than it does to the number of residents. The office towers, hotels and retail at Ventura/Sepulveda already provide density, and there is more developable land (e.g. Camarillo and Sepulveda) at the 405/101 interchange. You don’t have nearly as much room at Van Nuys/Ventura, which is anyway occupied by low-rise strip malls and fast food joints. In addition, by adding that Sepulveda stop, you capture all the people on those bus lines who want to head over the hill.

Now, if adding that station, or realigning things such that Sepulveda/Ventura replaces Van nuys/Ventura, ends up adding huge amounts of coin to the point where it imperils the economics of the line, that’s one thing. All things being equal, detouring to Sepulveda/Ventura is clearly the better option.

I agree with most of this route, and also hope it extends to LAX and beyond to the South Bay, and eventually, Long Beach.

However, north of the Van Nuys Metrolink station, I believe the route should run follow the old PE ROW on Van Nuys, Parthenia, and Sepulveda. It’s much easier to have the line above-grade this way, as Van Nuys narrows considerably past Parthenia.

@HollywoodF1: "I agree. And I’m intrigued to see the southern section connection to the Green and Crenshaw Lines. And what does this mean for the prospects of Lincoln Blvd?"

@robb: Because it doesnt make sense for the line to take a detour when UCLA is directly south of Van Nuys Blvd. Getting to sepulveda just for sake will add cost to the project. Its only one rapid bus stop away from van nuys blvd

I made some comments on this a few months ago at http://www.stevelandharris.com/2010/11/08/transit-on-the-405/
Then it was for the contrary to this to get some rail going the opposite direction from the Orange Line to the Green Line along the 405.
Amid the study of Van Nuys Blvd do we really learn how much ridership is along Van Nuys.
I lived in Sherman Oaks for a while and rode the Rapid 761 daily to the other side of the hill, worst part of the commute was the hill itself which is a steep grade (a slow ride up sometimes dotted with overheated buses from the climb), and heavily trafficked, let’s not forget crush-loaded buses at peak hours year around (though Rapid 754 is still more crowded more often) and at all times during the summer especially being the only bus route over for the valley until you get to the infrequent Line 218 on Laurel Canyon or the Red Line way over in Universal City but going the other way the 761 would empty out by Van Nuys/Ventura then fill up again at the Van Nuys Orange Line station (but then the burden is reduced by the Local 233 backing it up). I’m all in favorite of the whole corridor being studied together as one for Van Nuys Blvd, the Sepulveda Pass, AND the gap from there to get the Purple, Expo, Crenshaw, and Green Lines. Heading up Van Nuys Blvd you’d notice how broad the median is and I think we could imagine a few ways to improve the greater Los Angeles north-south commute.

No, Van Nuys is a much more inhabited thoroughfare than Sepulveda. Van Nuys has commercial districts, true, but residential right nearby, just steps away from VNB.

Sepulveda has a lot of light industrial uses, some commercial, but very little in the way of residential neighborhoods. I’ve ridden buses on both. Sepulveda bus line is usually very sparsely used, even during rush hour. VNB bus line is almost always packed.

Sepulveda and Ventura may seem like an important intersection, but it really isn’t. It can be bypassed. Anyone coming from the west to take the subway can go the extra mile or so to VNB and Ventura.

The worst thing Metro can do now is to study the Van Nuys and Sepulveda corridors separately (as it is currently slated to do). If the two corridors are studied apart, it is very likely that we will end up with 2 completely separated and unconnected "enhanced bus service" corridors rather than one integrated rail line that also connects to existing (under construction) rail lines.

Metro’s environmental impact evaluation methodology will prohibit the the study group/consultants from considering existence of a separate study (i.e. the Van Nuys study cannot take into account that there maybe a rail tunnel for the Sepulveda corridor; and the Sepulveda study cannot assume that Van Nuys will connect and continue as light rail to Sylmar). Basically, if these 2 studies are not combined, it will be a giant cluster f@uck. The only way to ensure both segments are constructed as rail line is to push Metro to study it as a single corridor. It’s probably the most important decision that we cannot afford to screw up because it will have long lasting impact the connectivity and network of LA’s future.

just build it already – I’ll take anything, either along Sepulveda or Van Nuys – just get me away from my daily hell on the 405…