Transportation headlines, Monday, June 25

Here is a look at some of the transportation headlines gathered by us and the Metro Library. The full list of headlines is posted on the Library’s Headlines blog, which you can also access via email subscription or RSS feed.

Authority puts $1.75 million toward Metrolink station at Bob Hope Airport (Burbank Leader)

The agency that oversees the airport set aside funds for the station that would be located at Hollywood Way and San Fernando Road, which would be convenient for those traveling from the Antelope Valley and trying to reach the airport. The airport’s current Metrolink station is on the Ventura County Line.

Drivers on the 10 get ready to pay for carpool lane (Pasadena Star News)

An overview of the ExpressLanes project that is coming to the 10 freeway’s carpool lanes between downtown L.A. and the 605 freeway early next year. As the article states, many motorists in the San Gabriel Valley try to avoid the 10 because it is often congested but the two carpool lanes in each direction with much lower traffic volumes than the regular lanes may be enough to lure some motorists willing to pay the congestion pricing toll.

Santa Monica traffic, is it really that bad — part 1 (L.A. Streetsblog)

Intriguing post by Gary Kavanaugh suggesting that perhaps the traffic in the Republic of Santa Monica is exaggerated by those living there. As a former seven-year resident, I agree with Gary’s assessment that there are some hotspots that are pretty bad. The bigger problem, I think, is that Santa Monica is also surrounded by other traffic hotspots (example: all of Lincoln Boulevard) that make moving through the area an ordeal at times.

“Straphanger” book review (The Atlantic Cities and Primary Resources)

A new book by Taras Grescoe titled “Straphanger: Saving Our Cities from Ourselves and the Automobile” looks at transit around the world. Primary Resources has a positive review and the Atlantic Cities has an interview with Grescoe.


7 replies

  1. Burbank Airport’s existing Metrolink station only gets 11 trains in each direction a day (and that’s just the weekday count). Even with Burbank’s flight limits (which is artificially low, given what Westchester and El Segundo put up with at LAX), there should still be room for additional passengers at the new station. And that doesn’t include the possibility of airline/ airport employees using the train to commute to work.

    And flights come and go at all times of the day, so we need to have trains stopping at all times.

    Metrolink needs more trains on all of its routes, and when it gets more trains, they can add some express trains for those who don’t want to stop at the new station.

    As it happens, there is grade separation at Hollywood Way, so it will be interesting to see what the new station looks like.

  2. With the capacity limitations at Burbank Airport, I am skeptical that this will attract that many more passengers on the train, or that the station will be well used. But, it is the airport’s money, so if they want to spend it, they can go ahead… better than yet another parking lot nearby.

  3. Frank M. is right re politicians making transit decisions. Makes as much sense as them calling military shots in the field. Oh, yeah. Never mind.

  4. I agree with Erik, this is not a perfect world. It is better to have an additional station than not to have access for the Antelope Valley passingers. The new station will be accessible to more bus lines as well. I think that airport should do is to build automatic indoor people movers to move passingers to these Metrolink two stations so that people don’t have to work to the terminals after they get off the trains and buses in the hot weather.

  5. @Todd: The new station on the Antelope Valley Metrolink line will be in addition to the existing Amtrak/Metrolink station on the Ventura County Metrolink line that is also used by Surfliner and by the Coast Starlite, all of which stop at the current station.

    You complain will be valid if and when the terminal is moved over to the east side of the airfield, but until then, this allows easier access from Lancaster/Palmdale/Newhall to BUR and allows someone travelling from Union Station to get to BUR via another batch of trains (which admittedly they can do now from the Downtown Burbank station via the Shuttle van).

  6. Seriously, what part of “people have lots of luggage to schlep around when going to an airport” do transit planners do not get?

    Any other country in the world, they figured out the most obvious: make the trains that go directly into the airport, not “half way there” “only a mile away” “there’s a shuttle van for the last stretch.” No, no, and no. We need a station DIRECTLY UNDERNEATH the airport, so all one needs is take the escalator up or down directly to/from the terminal.

    Seriously, this is what happens when you leave politicians at the helm of transit planning. They get nothing right.

  7. The new BUR station will be too far from the Airport for anyone with a bag to walk. A shuttle will be required. So really, this station just cuts the distance that a shuttle van needs to travel.

    There’s already a free shuttle between the airport and the downtown Burbank station. So the new station means that people downtown are losing a shuttle in order to shave a few minutes off for Southbound passengers. It would be interesting to see the time savings and relative costs.