Instead of commemorating the recent launch of our Facebook fan page (and it’s safe to assume that if you’re reading this and you’re on Facebook, you’re either already a fan or will be one soon – all paths lead to you being a fan), it’s probably better to use today’s blog post to explain the various ways you can be the Foothill Extension’s biggest fan (minus yours truly).
Become a fan on Facebook (click image below) 
Follow our tweets on Twitter @iwillride (click image below) 
Watch us on YouTube (click image below) 
Subscribe to our blog entries via your RSS reader (Google Reader, NewsGator, etc) or via e-mail 
By combining the use of all these tools, you’ll be able to:
- Read and share our latest blog entries
- See pictures and videos of our latest efforts to get the Foothill Extension up and running to Azusa in 2013 and Montclair in 2017
- RSVP to our rallies and our meet-ups at Metro Board meetings
- Sound like an expert on all things Foothill Extension and impress people with your knowledge of trendy topics like congestion relief, transit-oriented development, pollution reduction, and clean transit alternatives
Alternatively, you could get a masters degree in transportation planning and engage in cost-benefit analysis on the project, looking at current and projected densities, travel behavior, and potential travel time savings in the corridor. But why do we need experts to do transportation planning? It’s just a political fight over tax dollars to induce expenditure effects. Why would we pursue projects that reduce inefficiencies in mobility and accessibility and boost long-term gross regional product?
Alternatively, you can support a regional transit project that’s ready to build, will immediately create thousands of jobs, reduce congestion for a large region of residents and commuters sooner rather than 30 years down the road, reduce pollution, and add billions in economic benefits.
Oh, and we support the Subway to the Sea as well. Nobody’s driven on the 210?
It’s not quite ready to build. It still needs a final EIS/EIR. That’s slightly ahead of the subway, which is in a DEIR phase.
I can think of thousands of projects that are ready to build and create thousands of jobs. I lived in Claremont for 4 years and I hope the Gold Line Extension gets built at some point. It would provide a great alternative to getting to Pasadena. That being said, past San Dimas the line will parallel the Metrolink San Bernardino line, and I’d rather travel Metrolink speed than light rail speed through the corridor. At current speeds, the 50+ mile line from Union Station to the Ontario airport will take about 2 hours. It just seems to me that given densities and mode alternatives in the corridor, LRT ridership may not support frequencies that would make it an attractive alternative. The extension would require at least 4X the operations funding of the existing gold line. Because of this, I would think that dedicated ROW BRT (a la Orange Line, but potentially with spurs on city streets to service areas away from the line) would offer the headways and travel time savings to make transit a viable alternative to car and light duty truck travel.
Also, traffic on the 210 isn’t that bad. I know everyone thinks their traffic is bad, but that’s because they haven’t been on the 405 during rush hour with any regularity.
I would love to see a ridership study so that I could be better informed.
Actually Juan, the EIR for Phase 2A of the Foothill Extension – which takes it to Azusa – was approved in 2007. You were partially correct. Phase 2B still needs an EIR, however it is still much further ahead of the Subway in the planning process (which by the way just received approval from the Metro Board instructing Leahy to pursue federal funds).
Yes, thousands of projects of can be ready to build and create thousands of jobs. But none of them are in Measure R except for the Foothill Extension. In fact, according to a report by the LA Times, very few projects in California that received federal stimulus dollars had fit this criteria. And yet the Foothill Extension was not supported by Metro to receive stimulus money. You get the frustration?
As for the 210, I’m not sure about your assessment because it’s a major complaint (yes we all complain about traffic) that drives a lot of our supporters. The same can be said for many Westside residents who haven’t been on the 210.
As for ridership (even though I know comparing ridership numbers are futile), ridership would increase by 3.3 million additional boardings a year with Phase 2A in place. In 2030, the projected ridership for the Gold Line stands at 68,000 a day.
The Foothill Extension will not lower congestion on the 210 – you are incredibly naive to think so, Albert. Any riders that transfer modes from private vehicle to the new line will be REPLACED by drivers that transfer from different times (non peak to peak), modes (transit to car), and routes (arterial streets to freeway). Congestion on the 210 will return to the same, and then HIGHER, levels. TRANSIT DOES NOT SOLVE CONGESTION! There are countless examples to prove this – for one, just look at New York City – a robust subway system (the best in the U.S.) and there is still extreme congestion. The 210 will always be congested as long as driving is as cheap as it is (i.e. no congestion pricing, higher gas taxes, VMT fees, etc.). The fact that you are touting the Foothill Extension as a congesiton reliever is plain ridiculous, and you are advised to speak to an actual expert on traffic and transportation issues before you make such a uneducated statement.
Your argument that Foothill should be built merely because it is READY is also ridiculous. Why don’t we build all “ready” projects, even if they are wastes of taxpayer money? After all, they’re ready! So just build them! Thanks for all the jokes!