Template talk:K Line (Los Angeles Metro)

Aviation/LAX not part of the project

There's a bit of confusion here because there are two different ways people use "Crenshaw/LAX line." The name is used for the current construction project extending from Expo/Crenshaw to the current Green Line. It's also used to refer to the eventual Metro service that will run on the infrastructure being built.

The project as it's currently under construction does not include the Aviation/LAX station, as that's already been built and is not being added to as part of this project. As this map somewhat awkwardly shows, the new line connects just to the west of Aviation/LAX.

The planned service patterns that will use the new infrastructure are shown on the map on the final page of this PDF. There will be a line (designated K on that map, though that may change) that runs the length of the Crenshaw/LAX Line project and also along the southwest leg of the current Green line (although as you can see it will not pass through Aviation/LAX). Another line (labelled L on that map) will run along the eastern portion of the current Green Line, through Aviation/LAX station, then turn up and travel a bit along the new infrastructure of the Crenshaw/LAX line project. Since that map was put out, and additional station to the north of Aviation/Century has been added, Aviation/96th, which will also be served by Line L. Since Aviation/96th will be ultimately be the place where passengers connect to the LAX Train people mover, it's likely that the current Aviation/LAX will get a new name.

At any rate, there's no real sense in which the current Aviation/LAX station is part of the project. It will be connected to the new infrastructure, but it's no more part of the project than Mariposa or the other South Bay stations. Once the line is open and we know the service patterns, we can tweak this, but while it's under construction, I think only the actually new stations being built should be on this template. --Jfruh (talk) 02:00, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Integration with C no longer set in stone -- needs an update

Hello all -- as I've noted in my latest update to the K Line (Los Angeles Metro) article, Metro is once again rethinking the future service patterns of how this line will integrate with the rest of the system once it connects to the C Line in 2023. I've updated the article text, but I'm not savvy enough with the syntax to update the diagram here. Can someone modify this template so that it only includes the under-constrution section, or perhaps hides the connection to the C Line behind a "see more" link and notes that it's only proposed? I feel strongly that including it on the template in its current form, without any note that planning is in flux, violates WP:CRYSTAL. If Metro does decide to go with the service pattern now portrayed in this diagram, it would be easy enough to revert back to it. --Jfruh (talk) 20:09, 24 April 2022 (UTC)