L.A Metro purple line paper

Introduction

The Purple Line Extension Project is a subway extension project designed and implemented by the Metropolitan Transport Authority in Los Angeles. The extension is meant to connect Westside and downtown Los Angeles and reduce traffic congestion in key targeted areas including Wilshire, Beverly Hills, and Westwood. The extension is expected to cost an estimated $3.2 billion that is to be funded by taxpayers within the county and contributions from the federal government (Linton, 2019). Despite being opposed initially by politicians in key targeted areas, the line has received a great deal of support in the recent past due to a growing population that was putting pressure on available transport options. The first and second phases of the line are expected to be completed by 2025, although the county government expects to receive additional funding that will ensure all three phases are complete by 2028.

Goals and Objective of the Project

The main goal of the Purple Line Extension (PLE) project is to provide services to more riders in downtown Los Angeles and connect more areas to the existing Purple Line subway. Since its construction, the Purple Line subway became a key means of transport for commuters within the city and the number of daily ridsers soon exceeded expectations. Traffic congestion in parts of the city that are not covered by the subway also led to demand for the subway extension by commuters. Key areas not covered by the subway include Wilshire, Century City, and Westwood (Conneeny, 2019). Although the project was proposed by the state agencies, it soon received widespread support from residents in key areas who believe the extension will ease traffic congestion and make commuting between different parts of the city easier.

Traffic congestion has historically been a major issue in Los Angles and surrounding areas, and even but the introduction of the subway did not have a major effect on traffic congestion in the area. According to Nero (2019), Los Angeles is still ranked as the worst city in the U.S. in terms of traffic congestion. The PLE was meant to aid in reducing existing congestion by reducing their use of private vehicles in target areas and as consequently a result traffic congestion in general. For example, Residents interviewed for the study also believed that the subway extension will aid in reducing traffic congestion in Wilshire and other target areas as the number of commuters that use the train increases. The main goal of the PLE was, therefore, to ease traffic congestion in target areas by connecting commuters to the main subway line. 

The expansion of the Metro line was also expected to provide an environmentally friendly transport option that would aid in reducing environmental pollution. As more commuters select to use the line instead of their personal vehicles, the carbon footprint of the city is expected to be reduced and as a result the level of pollution caused by transportation in the city.  Comment by Author: This is same intro that was in your proposal; but your analysis then shifted to include economics as another metric for assessing the PLE—does that happen in this revision?

Costs and Timelines

The PLE project was originally approved in 2012 after an environmental impact analysis showed it can be completed viably with minimum damage to the environment. The project was split into three phases that will be implemented sequentially. The main goal of the project as identified during its official launch was connecting Westside and downtown Los Angeles. The LA Country Economic Development Corporation estimates the project will cost $3.2 billion to complete and will create more than 25,000 jobs for local residents. Comment by Author: Are these short-term (e.g. construction jobs) or long-term as a consequence of improved transit?

The project is currently managed by the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), with the MTA’s board of directors being responsible for key decisions regarding the line (Berardi, 2019). This increases the chances of the project being successful as there is a clear managerial structure in place and a system of reviewing a key decision that impacts on project activities. The cost of the project is expected to be met by the taxpayer, which also means the project is not likely to be delayed because of a lack of funding. The total cost of the project is being funded by two tax schemes put in place by the county government. The first scheme intends to increase sales tax in the county by half a cent, which is expected to generate a total of $585 million that will meet a quarter of the project requirements. The second scheme will increase sales tax by one cent and is expected to generate $860 million. A total of $1.65 billion is supposed to be contributed by Federal Aid for the project.

The MTA is, however, looking for additional funding that can be used to speed up project activities and ensure that the project is completed before the scheduled completion date because Los Angeles will host the 2028 Olympic Games (Shaver, 2019). In terms of funding, the project is therefore not likely to be delayed due to the lack of resources, as reliable funding sources have already been identified. Comment by Author: Dependent on tax increases or bonds? Did voters approve these revenue sources?

Construction Phases

The first phase of the project will connect Wilshire with La Brea, Fairfax, and La Cienega and is expected to be completed by 2023. Phase two will connect Wilshire with Rodeo and Century City with Constellation, and is expected to be completed by 2025. The third phase of the project will connect Wilshire with UCLA and the Westwood with VA Hospital, and is expected to be completed by 2027.

The Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) relied heavily on the input of the public in identifying key areas that will be covered by the subway. Citizen engagement through town hall meetings and surveys were used to get feedback from the public on the project proposal and determine areas with a high population that can benefit the most from a subway line. This also increases the chance of the project being successful and achieving its goals as areas identified for the project are ones that stand to benefit the most from traffic decongestion. The MTA is still holding public forums at different points of the year that are meant to evaluate the project and determine if it will serve in the best interests of the local population. Based on the input received from the public, the MTA is considering changing the third phase of the project that is intended to connect Westwood with VA Hospital, although this decision has not been finalized yet. The Design of the project takes into consideration the interests of the public, which increases the chances of achieving its key goal of reducing traffic congestion in the target areas. Comment by Author: Oops, just trying to show that’s not a capital D

Project Plan

The project was initially proposed by the county government as a way of addressing traffic congestion in different parts of the city that was increasingly getting worse. The proposal was initially met with opposition from representatives of targeted areas who believed a project of that magnitude is likely to have major environmental impacts that could be long-lasting. An environmental assessment, however, showed that the project could be efficiently undertaken.

Key project planning g tools that were used to gather information about the project included town hall meetings and surveys carried out by the project staff, where residents gave their opinion on whether or not they believe the line is necessary and specific areas where stations were to be located. Surveys were carried out both in person as well as using phone calls that asked residents whether they believed a station will be beneficial in their community and any other thoughts they had regarding the subway extension. Detailed information was therefore collected by the MTA that was used in the design of the actual line and ensured that all key areas were covered.

Based on the information collected the MTA came up with the final design of the project that covered the identified areas. The contract for the construction of phase one of the project was awarded to renowned engineering firms, Skanska and J.F Shea Corporation. Phase two of the project was awarded to Tutor Perini and O & G industries.

Expected Effects of the Line

Upon completion of all key phases, the line is expected to significantly reduce traffic congestion in targeted areas. The high capacity subway line is expected to significantly reduce vehicle traffic in targeted areas including Wilshire, Beverly Hills, UCLA, and Westwood. Road transport is currently the main mode of transport used in the target areas, which has led to a great deal of congestion as the population grows. This significantly increases both (?) the cost of transportation, as commuters spend a great deal of time in traffic. The extension line will connect Westside and downtown LA, which will reduce the time and cost spent by commuters from the target areas. After the completion of the first and second phases of the project, the number of commuters using road transport is expected to reduce significantly. The cost of transportation will, as a result, be reduced as people will be spending less time in traffic. Comment by Author: Both…cost and ? time?

The completion of the subway extension is also expected to reduce the level of carbon pollution that is generated by road transport in the city. According to Gurney (2019), road transport in Los Angeles contributes a major portion of the total carbon pollution that is generated by the city. The completion of the extension will lead to a reduction in the number of commuters that rely on road transport, which will directly reduce the level of carbon pollution generated by the city. The line will also increase the income generated by the subway line, and the metropolitan transport agency, which will enable it to efficiently maintain existing lines and make improvements that may be needed.  Comment by Author: Are there estimates of number of riders? Number of cars that will be taken off road? Tons of emissions that will be eliminated? Any measure to assess the level of reductions? Comment by Author: Kind of a throw away line at this point; if you introduce economic assessment, as suggested in the outline, you’d need to do more to establish how much revenue, how much income (beyond what is needed to carry bond/debt), etc.

Environmental Review of the Project

The design of the project took into consideration the key features of the target areas with the aim of causing as little environmental damage as possible. Various environmental features were considered when determining the most ideal form of transport that should be used for each area. The options available include light and heavy rail and dedicated bus lines. Various proposals of the routes that could be used were analyzed to identify one that would cause the least disruption to the environment. The cost of operating daily trips to the targeted areas was also considered when evaluating the viability of each route in terms of the cost and returns that could be generated.

Key Challenges and Obstacles

In its initial stages, the project faced a great deal of opposition regarding the location of the line. Politicians in key target areas including Wilshire and Beverly Hill opposed the subway on the basis that it is likely to cause serious environmental damage in the course of its construction (Gibbons, 2018). The designation of part of Wilshire as a methane zone also made it difficult to construct tunnels for the project as there was a possibility dangerous explosions would result.

The growth of traffic in key targeted areas such as Wilshire, however, resulted in renewed support for the line. A growing population placed a great deal of strain on existing transportation options, including the bus rapid system that connected Wilshire to the downtown area of Los Angles. Political support was soon gained, after which proposals for the project started getting created. Environmental studies carried out also showed that the project could be safely completed without causing any serious environmental damage to the targeted areas. Comment by Author: Citation/reference?

The subway extension project still faces opposition from several groups that believe it will destroy key structures and establishments in the target areas. MTA was for example sued by the school district in Beverly Hills that was protesting the construction of the subway tunnel under one of its buildings. The case was however dismissed after the court determined that detailed assessments had been made that took into consideration all existing structures.

 A challenge facing the project is the sourcing of funds that can be used to ensure the project is completed on time. Based on the project budget and the time it will take for the MTA to receive all the required funds, the project may delay and may not meet the 2028 deadline as planned (Sharp, 2018). The county government hopes to be able to complete the project by 2028 ion time for the Olympic Games that will be held in Los Angeles. Additional sources of funding are however yet to be identified, which increases the likelihood of the project delaying and missing the targeted completion date. Comment by Author: This is presumably referring to Garcetti’s “28 by 28” proposal; will Measure R and M provide the money that MTA claims they will need to accomplish the 28 projects by the time of the Olympics?

Comparison to Similar Projects

When compared to similar projects, there is a high likelihood that the project will be successful based on the challenges that have been faced by similar projects. The London Cross rail 2 project is, for example, almost similar to the Purple Line Extension, as it is also a high budget extension of an existing subway line in a major city. The Cross rail 2 project is on course to being completed after major delays relating to delayed funding. Like the Cross rail 2 project, the Purple Line Extension also faces the possibility of budget shortfalls that may significantly increase the time it takes to complete the project. Comment by Author: While it is a similar project in concept (i.e. subway line in a big city), is it really similar in absolute sense: similar length, similar construction challenges, similar costs, similar goals? In other words, how similar is it?

Completed sections of the Crossrail 2 have been able to achieve set goals in terms of easing congestion, which can be used as a basis of gauging the ability of the Purple Line Extension to achieve its goal of easing congestion between the Westside and downtown sections of Los Angeles. After the completion of phase one of the Cross-rail project, the majority of commuters in target areas immediately began using it for commuting, which significantly reduced the road traffic congestion and the negative effects it has on the environment (Reynolds, 2018). This means the Purple Line extension is likely to have the same impact because targeted areas are currently dealing with major traffic congestion.   Comment by Author: Has the history of Metro ridership in LA been similar to that in London? What % of LA commuters use subway? What % in London? How comfortable can you be in projecting success of PLE based on London experience? What was result of Gold Line extension in LA? Or other Metro projects?

Conclusion

The ongoing Purple Line extension project is on course to achieve its main goal of providing a highly efficient and high capacity transport system that connects downtown and Westside Los Angles. After the completion of the extension of traffic congestion in key target areas is expected to reduce significantly as well as the carbon footprint of the city. The project is being efficiently managed by the Metropolitan Transport Authority that has the needed expertise and technical knowledge to oversee crucial project activities. Funding for the project is also available, although delays in completion are expected if additional funding is not received that can be used to accelerate project activities. Comment by Author: Better job in keeping the focus on just the two variables—congestion and carbon emissions—instead of the introducing finances as you proposed in outline/proposal

Interviews

Interviewee One: Peterson Smith Comment by Author: Who is Smith? How were these interviewees selected? Who do they represent? Metro or average Angelino or ? I think we’d agreed that at least one or more of the interviewees needed to be someone that could speak as a representative of at least some level of MTA—is one of these an MTA official/employee?

1. Do you think there is traffic congestion in parts of Los Angeles?

Yes, there is traffic congestion in LA that is overwhelming at times. But being a long-time resident I know all the traffic hot spots and use less congested routes during rush hour.

2. Which mode of transport do you use to commute?

 I used to use the bus rapid system that operates in my areas but it reached a point where you couldn’t get a spot on some days. I have to go back to using my vehicle which takes more time but at least it's reliable.

3. Do you think transport in L.A will get better or worse in the future? the population keeps growing and the transport option remains almost the same, which could lead to a crisis in the future when existing options are overwhelmed. Unless the government finds ways of expanding existing options.

4. Do you think the subway extension will help?

Subway extension will definitely help. The bus rapid system runs at capacity currently which forces many people to use cars. The subway will accommodate more people and reduce the number of vehicles on the road.

5. Do you use the subway regularly?

There is no station where I live but I would prefer to use a subway as this will imply spending less time in traffic. I have used the Purple Line Subway before and I think it's efficient.  

6. Do you think traffic congestion harms the environment?

Thousands, maybe millions of cars every day in the city definitely harms the environment in more ways than we can explain. Comment by Author: In general, do you have comments or analysis of these interviews? How realistic are their comments? Can you reach general conclusions from the interviews? What value do they add to the analysis above? Do they deserve their own analysis?

Interviewee Two: Joseph Johansen

1. Do you think there is traffic congestion in parts of Los Angeles?

No question, there is traffic congestion in LA which can get exceedingly worse on some days. Despite all the modern infrastructure the high number of people in the city just overwhelm the transport system.

2. Which mode of transport do you use to commute?

I don’t really commute that much, but if I did I would definitely use the subway as there is a station in my area. All other options would definitely be slower and costlier.

3. Do you think transport in L.A will get better or worse in the future?

I can only hope so because things are already bad, if it gets worse people are going to have a hard time getting to work and doing their businesses.

4. Do you think the subway extension will help?

Subway extension will help in reducing congestion when it's done. The number of cars in the downtown area will reduce as more people will be using the subway. Other transport options such as the bus rapid system will also aid in easing congestion.

5. Do you use the subway regularly?

Sadly, not but I think it’s the best thing in LA traffic. It costs less than using a personal vehicle and is more efficient in getting you where you want to go.

6. Do you think traffic congestion harms the environment?

Global warming is real and when you have all these cars in the city everyday things will definitely get worse in the future for the environment.

Interviewee Three: Ricky Alvarez

1. Do you think there is traffic congestion in parts of Los Angeles?

Of course, you can’t live in this city and not talk about traffic. I believe I personally waste more than two hours on bad traffic daily.

2. Which mode of transport do you use to commute?

I use my personal vehicle, as there are pretty much no efficient public means in my area.

3. Do you think transport in L.A will get better or worse in the future?

The population just keeps increasing and transport alternatives remain the same/.

4. Do you think the subway extension will help?

The subway line will help, but not much due to the high number of people in the city. 

5. Do you use the subway regularly?

I don’t really use it because it does not go through where I live, but I hope to use it in the future when it becomes available.

6. Do you think traffic congestion harms the environment?

I think traffic does a lot of damage to the environment in terms of carbon gases that get into the atmosphere. Comment by Author: The three, stand-alone, interviews don’t add much context to the analysis above nor do you provide any summary or reflection on them/their content. The idea to incorporate interviews into this project wasn’t just to give you another hoop to jump through, but to challenge you to integrate another source of information into the analysis. The formal assertions of Metro documents about the project or their rosy projections about future ridership, might be viewed differently if majority of representatives of the public suggested they won’t use it, even when it’s done or the opposite. With a sample of 3, hard to generalize; time to conduct some more interviews? Time to provide some analysis of the interviews? Summarize what respondents said? What implications might be for the extension to actually accomplish its goals?

References

Berardi, E. (2019). LA County Metro Unveils Two New TBMs for Purple Line Extension. Retrieved from ENR: https://www.enr.com/articles/47100-la-metro-unveils-two-new-tbms-for-purple-line-extension

Conneeny, S. (2019). Metro amends subway extension budget to $3.2 billion. Retrieved from Daily Bruin: https://dailybruin.com/2019/03/08/metro-amends-subway-extension-budget-to-3-2-billion/

Gibbons, E. (2018). Readers React: Beverly Hills’ legal fight against the Purple Line extension isn’t over yet. Retrieved from LA Times: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/readersreact/la-ol-le-beverly-hills-purple-line-20181016-story.html

Gurney, K. (2019). Climate data scientist maps CO2 emissions for entire Los Angeles Megacity to help improve environmental policymaking. Retrieved from Newswise: https://www.newswise.com/articles/climate-data-scientist-maps-co2-emissions-for-entire-los-angeles-megacity-to-help-improve-environmental-policymaking

Linton, J. (2019). Metro Expected to Approve Final Purple Line Subway Section 3 Contract this Week. Retrieved from SBL: https://la.streetsblog.org/2019/02/27/metro-expected-to-approve-final-purple-line-subway-section-3-contract-this-week/

Nero, M. (2019). Here's How Los Angeles Ranks Among Traffic Congestion. Retrieved from Patch : https://patch.com/california/los-angeles/here-s-how-los-angeles-ranks-among-traffic-congestion

Reynolds, L. (2018). Crossrail 2: What Is It, When Will It Launch And What's Its Route? Retrieved from Londonist : https://londonist.com/london/transport/crossrail-2-route-map-stations-launch-date-cost-when-where

Sharp, S. (2018). Underway for Purple Line Extension to Century City. Retrieved from Urbanize: https://urbanize.la/post/its-official-construction-underway-purple-line-extension-century-city

Shaver, K. (2019). Purple Line will open a year late and delays will cost at least $215 million, contractor says. Retrieved from WP: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/purple-line-will-open-at-least-a-year-late-and-delays-will-cost-at-least-215-million-contractor-says/2019/01/09/34898e76-139e-11e9-803c-4ef28312c8b9_story.html