Gold Line extension plays cruel joke on riders

If you have driven along 1st Street in downtown Los Angeles lately, you may have noticed a difference: there are railroad tracks in the pavement that weren’t there a few weeks ago.

The tracks are part of an extension of the light-rail Gold Line that will connect East Los Angeles to Union Station, with trains continuing to Pasadena. The line is scheduled to open in 2009.

Think about that for a second, and then take a hard look at the accompanying photo. . . .

So what’s wrong with the picture?

The new rail line, in a way, is cruel. Imagine boarding the train in Boyle Heights and then rolling down 1st Street directly toward the heart of downtown.

“Toward” is the operative word there. Just when the train hits the outskirts of the business district, it turns north on Alameda Street toward Union Station. If the heart of downtown is your destination, you must switch to the subway at Union Station and go back to where you were heading in the first place.

What’s the big deal about that?

If you believe that mass transit should take you where you want to go -- not kind of near where you want to go, then it’s dumb.

It also violates the first rule of commuting in Los Angeles: Always head toward your destination.

And the solution to this?

A light-rail line that would serve as a downtown connector by tying together the four light-rail lines that eventually will run into downtown. The Blue Line from Long Beach and the future Expo Line from Culver City end at 7th and Flower streets while the Gold Lines both run to Union Station.

The benefit is obvious. If built, the connector would allow a single train to run, for example, from Long Beach to Pasadena or East L.A. to Culver City. That means less time-munching transfers and more direct routes.

But isn’t this just another one of those mythical rail lines that will never get built but this column likes to trumpet because of its unhealthy fetish about urban rail?

Perhaps.

On the other hand, the idea is being taken seriously in transit circles. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority staff already has declared the connector as its highest priority, but ultimately it is the politicians and their appointees who serve on the MTA board who will make the final call next spring when the agency cements its 25-year plan.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, one of the board members, has often said the connector is a priority, and this year he persuaded the board to approve a study of the project that must be done in order to secure future funding.

Money, as usual, is the big problem -- the MTA has $55 billion in projects it wants to build over the next 30 years but has identified only $4 billion in funding. The connector is estimated to cost $880 million if built by 2024.

Bang your head against the breakfast table before asking why it might take 17 years to build a two-mile rail line. This is, after all, the City of Extremely Low Expectations.

In the meantime, the MTA is looking at a variety of routes for the connector, including some that take it underground downtown and other routes that would run along streets, said Diego Cardoso, an executive officer for the agency’s planning office.

That’s always a controversial notion, and cars might be the loser. But the upside is a train that may actually take you where you want to go.

On a similar note, just how evil is traffic on the Santa Monica Freeway these days?

As many readers probably are aware, the proliferation of jobs on the Westside has turned the 10 Freeway into the highway to hell.

Last Wednesday, this column couldn’t avoid the freeway and timed how long it took to drive west at 8 a.m. from Normandie to La Brea avenues, a distance of 2.8 miles.

The first mile flew by in 6 minutes, 20 seconds. The second mile breezed by in another 9 minutes, 38 seconds. By the time the car’s wheels actually touched La Brea: 22 minutes, 5 seconds for a mind-bending average of about 7.6 mph. Hardly anyone was carpooling. Which brings us to. . .

Any more details on how to pay for the “subway to the sea”?

Attentive readers may recall that developer Ken Kahan offered a plan in this space two weeks ago.

Kahan believes that a state infrastructure finance district should be created that would include properties along Wilshire Boulevard (the subway is expected to mostly follow Wilshire).

How does it work? Let’s say a property is sold on Wilshire and the annual property taxes go up. That increase -- called a tax increment -- would be put into a fund to build infrastructure. Such as a subway.

Given the absence thus far of a subway funding plan from elected officials, Kahan’s idea is worth a further look. Yes, it’s a little wonky. But here are four things you should know:

1. State law would need to be changed, since the Legislature created infrastructure districts to help undeveloped areas.

2. Creating a district requires a vote of two-thirds of the people who live on Wilshire.

3. The district does not increase taxes. It diverts some of what would be a normal revenue increase to an infrastructure district for up to 30 years. Officials could then borrow money to build a subway, for example, and use the extra property tax revenue to pay off the loan.

4. However, agencies that might have otherwise received that extra tax revenue would have to approve the plan.

And therein lies the rub. If you live in the city of Los Angeles, for example, about half of each property tax dollar you pay goes to the city and county, with the other half going to the state and schools. All those entities need property tax revenues to keep rising -- because their costs are always rising -- and they may block an infrastructure district for that very reason.

Is there that much money to be gained from a tax increment?

In all probability, yes.

One of the striking things about the county’s property tax revenue is that the amount has risen almost every year for the last three decades.

There’s no reason to believe that also wouldn’t be true on a long corridor such as Wilshire, with its hundreds of parcels. Remember -- if taxes increase $500,000 on a newly developed property, that’s $500,000 of increment that would go to the subway each year during the life of the infrastructure district.

Kahan’s plan seemingly offers some other pluses. Not all the tax increment needs to go to an infrastructure district -- some can keep going to government agencies. And since it is unlikely that the state or the feds would pay for the entire subway -- at an anticipated cost of at least $5 billion -- a district could provide some of the money without raising sales taxes, a frequent government tactic when it comes to paying for mass transit.

“What better way to build the subway than let those who benefit the most from it pay for it,” Kahan said. “Every party I’ve ever talked to about this says ‘Great idea but you’ve got to get the county and city to agree’ -- and the reason it’s not happening is because the politicians can’t make it happen.”

We’ll leave it there for this week, but next week we’d like to know what politicians at the county and city think.

Let’s wrap it up with a quiz: The chance to win which of the following was recently offered to city staffers willing to take a tree seedling home with them as part of Villaraigosa’s million-tree plan?

A) A new TV

B) A pony

C) A tasty -- but healthy! -- afternoon snack with the mayor

Answer: A is correct, but C would be more entertaining.

Next week: The quest for a three-eyed fish.

--

steve.hymon@latimes.com

Times staff writer David Zahniser contributed to this report.