When I was 11 years old, my dad took my sisters and me downtown
to ride the newly opened Metropolitan Transportation Authority Red
Line subway. We drove downtown, parked our car, and hopped on the
subway to explore this new and exciting transportation option.
Looking back on the event, I guess this quaint anecdote sums up
the inherent problems and promise of the Red Line. There we were,
energetic and excited Angelenos, eager to experience the
city’s new subway. Yet, as denizens of the West Side, we had
to drive to the subway to actually use it. The Red Line could serve
no practical purpose for us, no matter how cool we thought it was.
And so, after that one Sunday afternoon subway ride with my family,
I never used it again.
Now, years later, the subway has found its niche in the Los
Angeles transit system ““ I sometimes hear stories of downtown
businessmen garaging their German cars and using the subway to get
from their mid-Wilshire homes to work. The Red Line also goes from
downtown to Hollywood and the San Fernando Valley, and it has stops
in Universal City and North Hollywood.
But for residents of the West Side, the subway is still a
dream.
Yet recent rumblings in the city government point to a possible
renewal of subway expansion. While the proposed expansion is modest
and would still keep the Red Line miles from Westwood, the talk of
new construction allows us to revisit the dream of a subway that
really does traverse the city.
In mid-February the MTA board voted to renew the issue of subway
expansion, setting the stage for a discussion of the Red
Line’s fate.
The MTA can now explore extending the subway west along Wilshire
Boulevard to Fairfax Avenue (about five miles from campus), which
was part of the MTA’s initial construction plan in the 1980s
before a series of problems ““ including a sinkhole in
Hollywood, cost overruns and a methane gas explosion ““ cut
the project short.
After the 1985 explosion in the Fairfax district, local
representative Henry Waxman was able to pass a congressional
measure that banned using federal funds for tunneling in areas with
methane gas. Then in 1998, voters approved a measure proposed by
Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky that barred the use
of local sales tax dollars for subway tunneling. These events
halted the expansion of the subway westward, so it currently stops
at Western Avenue.
Already, the old problems that halted subway expansion appear to
be surmountable with new technology. Chiefly, the issue of
tunneling through methane gas fields can now be overcome with new,
albeit expensive, tunneling techniques.
“I have a lot of faith in technology to deal with
technical issues, but this is a relatively serious health and
safety concern,” Urban Planning Associate Professor Leobardo
Estrada said. “It is probably resolvable but at a
considerable cost.”
Opponents of subway expansion often point to better bus service
or light rail as less expensive solutions to Los Angeles’
transportation crunch. So far, the Red Line, which is now 17.4
miles long, has cost $4.5 billion, and an expansion of the system
to Fairfax Avenue would cost approximately $1 billion.
“Light rail, either in the form of trams, trolleys, or
rapid buses, can be created at a far lower cost and, should there
be a reason, can be shifted to another route,” Estrada said.
“The question is whether one values flexibility in
transportation planning. Opponents of the Metro usually prefer
light rail.”
Yes, “hard rail” ““ or a subway ““ is more
expensive and causes more of a disruption to an area while it is
being built. But an underground metro is permanent. The MTA needs
to have long-term goals when it sets out to improve public
transportation. I knew this when I was a precocious (yet shy) lad
of 11 years, and I know it now. Let’s look at the big
picture.
Local government officials have pointed to the added commerce
that a subway could bring to the West Side as one reason to expand
the Red Line down Wilshire Boulevard. Yet, in order for the subway
to truly be effective, it needs to have a real destination.
“For Metro lines to be successful, they must be both a
place of destination and place of origin,” Estrada said.
“Otherwise they will have low ridership.”
Century City could be the destination the Red Line needs to make
it viable in the way that Estrada suggests. And while some may
think getting the Red Line to Westwood is a pipe dream, UCLA
““ a leading university surrounded by dense housing and
college-aged consumers ““ is the ultimate Red Line
destination.
Currently, the Red Line along Wilshire Boulevard has no
“destination,” and while an expansion to Fairfax Avenue
would be beneficial, it’s not a true
“destination” in the same vein as Westwood or Century
City.
“Many more miles of subway lines would have to be built
before it would have a major impact on the transit use patterns of
L.A. as well as the urban development of L.A.,” Estrada
said.
UCLA students might not like to hear it, but Estrada notes that
in the short term, USC has a much greater opportunity to benefit
from subway expansion because of that campus’ proximity to
downtown Los Angeles. It will take a great deal of time (and money,
natch) before all of Los Angeles can benefit from the subway.
But imagine how life at UCLA would change if there was a subway
stop nearby. What if students could avoid the high costs of renting
in Westwood Village by living somewhere else and commuting to
Westwood via subway? And if that doesn’t get you excited,
picture this: You and your friends are partying and want to hit
bars in Hollywood, but you can’t find a designated
driver.
Hello, subway.
E-mail Miller at dmiller@media.ucla.edu.