German
Spanish
French
Italian
Portuguese
Japanese
Korean
Russian
ChineseTore up from the floor up
Work crews are busy repaving the Orange Line busway between North Hollywood and Valley College. Buses exit the right of way in front of Valley College and use Chandler Boulevard to get to the North Hollywood station.
None of the four Metro Rail lines has needed its tracks replaced, even the Blue Line at age 16. However, Metro’s newest major project, the Orange Line, already needs repaving after a little more than a year in operation.
The Daily News and KCBS-Channel 2 report on the crumbling roadway. Metro advises passengers to expect delays on the street-running portions.
The busway, which cost more than $300 million to build, was able to provide a fast cross-Valley service and has attracted an impressive 20,000 boardings. This makes it the busiest bus service in the Valley. It also had a fast start-up, as building the right of way as rail would have delayed service for years.
But, if busways are ever going to bring Los Angeles up to the level of cities such as Curitiba, Brazil and Quito, Ecuador, is the relatively small upfront cost of ~$300 million worth it when the life cycle of the road is about a year. A concrete roadway would have probably put the cost closer to a rail line. This also begs the question of why Metro could not have brought local north-south bus lines on the busway a la Miami, saving riders a transfer.
Asphalt deteriorates rapidly, but when the road is only for buses than run every 5-10 minutes, and weather conditions have not been as harsh as the 2004-2005 winter, something is seriously wrong.
Discussion
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Please keep discussions civil: exercise Troll Controll.
Didn’t you get the memo? The entire corridor was designed to be rail and constructed accordingly. The “busway” was just the camel’s nose under the tent as a rail proposal would have been too expensive, too long, and politically dangerous. So instead the idea was to build a rail corridor with really cheap bus infrastructure and when it “failed” to propose a “solution.” Rail. You seem to be the only person who doesn’t know about the secret plan.
It is pretty pathetic that the busway has deteriorated so rapidly. I didn’t get the memo Robert is talking about, but I guess it wouldn’t be surprising the way money is thrown around and wasted in efforts to exhibit political neutrality and please everyone and no one all at once.
A cheap-o busway, an overpriced railway, a double-decker freeway, just choose one please.
Any idea how much these yearly repairs will cost?
You’re right, Robert. I was so out of the loop.
The problem now is that Metro has what Donald Rumsfeld would call a “catastrophic success.” You’ve got 20,000 boardings to account for and no place to put them.
Well Chris, more of a case of actually meeting predictions and thus shocking all involved. Even the math deficient M. Setty would admit that 20,000 boardings at 1500 per mile is still pretty weak for light rail justification.
Come on though. Does anyone here seriously believe that the Orange Line was not designed so as to prebuild as much light rail infrastructure as possible without giving away the punchline?
Monorail Mike Warner Center to Thousand Oaks, go go go.
Come on though. Does anyone here seriously believe that the Orange Line was not designed so as to prebuild as much light rail infrastructure as possible without giving away the punchline?
And you are shocked by this? I mean, you’re not just posturing on the ‘net, right? Sarcasm does not convey well in written type.
Of course it was done to be converted to rail in the future. Metro has to convert it to rail or refund the state money, with interest, if it doesn’t.
Likely, though, Metro (with a great deal of help from Villaraigosa) will push back the day of reckoning or get the loan forgiven.
But 20,000 boardings is impressive, especially since the Orange Line came from zero two years ago to the busiest bus line in the Valley.
I’ll spot you this one, Robert. You want to know where most of the riders came from? The old 420/156. The bulk of the ridership is coming from 156 refugees (the line is still there, but the service has been cut down and a lot of the buses have shifted to 233 service on Van Nuys Boulevard). Park & ride commuters comprise another thousand, and the remainder are going to the two colleges on the line.
No, they wont - according to Bart Reed of the Transit Coalition:
It was done as part of another bill and it consisted of one sentence addressing a definition that lets the busway be considered a guideway just like rail. So, this technicality was removed.
I’m thinkin’ more that Mr. V and the MTA will emphasize that unless the “valley” “steps up” then the “Valley” will be on the hook for the system they wanted. Thus SFV is faced with losing the Orange Line or paying for it to become rail. Clever politics, sickening politics.
In light of Dane Bramage’s post, Metro may be free and clear on the loan. I don’t know how the state would foreclose on the Orange Line if Metro had to refund the money.
In this case, consider the Orange Line a “ruined” corridor. If there’s no impetus to convert it to rail, it won’t be because L.A. has so many other viable corridors.
A busway isn’t so bad, especially not after the Valley embraced it. It’s flexible enough that Metro can go with the Miami option, or allow the various commuter buses serving the Valley to use the busway.
Okay, let’s all put on our tin foil hats, gentlemen and ladies, and roll out yet another conspiracy theory. I’ll you’ll find this one quite tasty.
The planned obsolescence of the busway was NOT done so that it could be converted to rail. Zev has been talking up the cool factor of busways so much that he’d eat his mustache before he’d oversee a conversion on the Orange Line. Of course, once he’s out of office in 10 or 20 years, who knows…
No, the self-implosion of the busway is to make people forget about the sinkhole on the Red Line in 1998, since the Subway to the Sea is going to be next in line for construction (once they move it to the top of the list).
Hey, if busways are just as prone to collapse and uselessness as a subway (or maybe even more so, since the damage to the Red Line happened before it even opened for business, and has had no problems since then), then hell, let’s build a subway since it’ll carry more people.
Anyone care to comment?
nothing like a good conspiracy to make people want to ride metro more. in fact the more the merrier, perhaps it’ll become a movie and people will start riding for the sensational aspect if nothing else.