Gov. Jerry Brown earlier this week signed into law AB 726, which would authorize Metro to utilize double articulated buses on the Metro Orange Line in the future. In a legislative update to staff, Metro CEO Phil Washington wrote: “This bill will allow Metro to significantly increase capacity on the Orange Line and will continue our leadership role by utilizing new technology to provide transportation service. This bill was sponsored by Metro.
The new study evaluates rail stations based on “a scorecard of 11 indicators, including factors like walkability, affordability, percentage of residents and employees who use transit, and number of jobs and households within 1/2 mile radius. We then used that information to grade 489 transit stations in 6 rail systems across the state, excluding commuter lines like Metrolink and Caltrain and Amtrak, but including L.A.’s bus rapid transit line given it’s rail-like qualities.”
The study also looked at “walkability, ridership levels, existing land-use and permitting policies, affordability and transit quality.” The Expo Line, which opened in 2012, is omitted.
I think the results are certainly interesting although not terribly surprising — visiting any of the stations in person gives you a fairly good idea how they’re performing. And let’s face it: tossing 11 factors into a blender to come up with a letter grade only gets you so far: the Gold Line’s Chinatown Station on the edge of downtown L.A. gets an A, but the 7th/Metro Station in the heart of DTLA gets an A-. The Gold Line’s Mariachi Plaza gets an A (perhaps because there is a big employer, a hospital, nearby) but the Gold Line’s South Pasadena Station gets a C-.
The South Pasadena Station is busy and has helped revitalize Mission Street. As I’ve noted in the past, it hasn’t attracted a ton of residential development, although the number of parcels available nearby are limited. The area around the station is largely residential and I don’t think anyone wants or expects serious commercial development nearby. Parking is limited. To my eye, the the station has been very successful — but gets dinged here, presumably, because it’s not near a ton of jobs.
As Cal Hollis, Metro’s Executive Officer for Countywide Planning Cal Hollis, told the LAT: “The less urban areas — Sacramento, San Diego and Santa Clara Valley — will score lower. Metro is in the middle, serving both urban and less urban areas. If you applied the same criteria to New York City transit, MUNI and BART would rank lower.”
Two other thoughts: It’s hardly news that transit-oriented development hasn’t happened in some parts of our county. It’s also not surprising that Metro’s subway (the Red/Purple Line) fared well. Unlike many of the agency’s light rail lines (such as the Blue Line), the subway doesn’t rigidly follow old rail right-of-ways — the subway, in fact goes mostly under busy streets such as Hill, 7th, Wilshire, Vermont, Hollywood and Lankershim. It’s Metro’s busiest rail line and runs under areas where there was already considerable and nearby commercial and residential development.
Ethan Elkind has some interesting thoughts on the study, namely that building it doesn’t always mean that people will show up. And he has some suggestions about what could be done in the future to beef up some station areas:
So what can be done to improve scores? First, local leaders with stations in their jurisdictions should plan for and encourage thriving, walkable neighborhoods around the stations. Second, state leaders can help underperforming areas that lack a market for new development by focusing state investment and financing programs in those areas, such as through green bonds and tax-increment financing. Finally, transit leaders should condition any rail expansion on a local commitment to transit-oriented development around the stations, and they should consider reducing service to underperforming stations in order to better serve stations with thriving neighborhoods around them.
Related Statistic: In the past decade, 2,017 housing units have been built in joint developments on Metro-owned properties; another 570 units are either under construction or in the negotiating phase. These developments typically take place on parcels that Metro purchased for transit project construction.