so rather then mucking up our great thread about city hall, i have come here.

so there has been alot of talk lately about upgrading / expanding our current highway system. from roberts 10 freeway plan, to the 71o tunnel and now talk of how cool a big dig style 1o1 would be.

but so many have been saying blah! its crap. dont waste the money. build trans. walk to work!

is the consensus out there that we really should stop all progress on the highway system that made our city what it is today? i mean seriously, does everyone think we should all patiently sit around on surface streets while out rail lines come out in 1o year increments?

im all for taking the train to work, that would be great. but as senator tom McClintock said, "the automobile offers advantages that no mass-transit system could ever begin to duplicate: high-speed, low-cost, doorstep-to-doorstep, 24-hour a day on call service in safety, convenience and comfort, offering infinite flexibility in travel schedules and routes."

do we really want to abandon a system like that?

LET THE GAMES BEGIN!!!!

First of all, the 710 tunnel is supposed to take 10 years to construct. If we had the urgency to build the rail system imagine how much we could cover in that same span of time. To get a good idea, just itemize what we've been able to accomplish in the past 10 years, even at our slow American pace of building light and heavy rail: Red Line, Green Line, Gold Line, Metrolink.

Now umagine what we could have done if we had the urgency of Madrid, where they're currently building a 25-mile subway in 30 months. 25 miles in less than 3 years! That's the entire Wilshire subway and a 405 line from the Valley to LAX. An even more ambitious project is taking place in Shanghai where they are literally expanding their system overnight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Subway):
Under construction

* Line 1, 2nd phase of North extension from Gongfu Xincun to Fujin Lu. Will be open at middle of 2007.
* Line 2, West extension from Zhongshan Park to Hongqiao Airport, 1st phase which run to Songhong Lu will open at 2006.
* Line 3, North extension from Jiangwan Town to Jiangyang Bei Lu will open at 2006
* Line 4, Construction on section from Damuqiao to Lancun Lu, and Dongfanglu station intersection with Line 2. Dongfang Lu will open at Oct,2006 as a 2-line interchange, otherswill open in the 2007.
* Line 5, South extension from Dongchuan Road to Jinshan Chemistry Industrial Zone; First phase which extend to Fengxian will start construction at middle of 2006.
* Line 6, 28.8 km long, will run in Pudong from Jiyang Lu to Gangcheng Lu. Will open in 2007.
* Line 7, 35km long, will run from Chentai Lu to Longyang Lu and cross the Expo 2010 zone. Projected to open in 2009.
* Line 8, 22.6 km long. 1st Phase (Shiguang Lu to Xizang Nan Lu) and 2nd Phase (Xizang Nan Lu to Chengshan Lu) both will open in 2007.
* Line 8, south extension from Chengshan Lu to Pujiang Expo Land will be open in 2009-2010.
* Line 9, 1st phase 35 km long, 2nd phase 26km long, will run from Songjiang New City to Chongming Island, first phase will reach Yishan Road, 2nd phase will reach Minsheng Road in Pudong, then the 3rd phase will extend to Dongjing Rd near A20 Road, 4th phase will extend to Chongming Island. 1st and 2nd phase will open in 2009.
* Line 10 From planned Hongqiao High Speed Railway Station (location undetermined) to New Jiangwan City, then to Waigaoqiao Free Trade Zone. And will have a branch near Hongqiao to Qibao. 1st phase (Hongqiao to New Jiangwan City) will be open in 2009.
* Line 11 120km long, with a A line and a B line. The A line is called "Main Line", from Jiading New City to Sanlin, then to Lingang New City in Nanhui near East Sea Bridge. Line B is called "Branch Line", from Anting Automobile City and Shanghai International Circuit to the northwest of A line. The line north of Yuyuan Rd. will open in 2009. And Nanhui part may be use low-speed malgev train.

Decades of freeway-widenings that wreck communities and put old folks out on the street coupled with horrible zoning have only made our traffic crisis worse! Insanity, my friend, is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

We can only solve our traffic crisis by adding another mode, heavily used by every other world-class city in the world. Every other world class city has congestion, every other city has traffic but their cities STILL MOVE because the citizens have an alternative to enduring traffic countless hours ever year. Just look at the maps:

NEW YORK:

http://de.geocities.com/nyc_rail/nyc-map.gif

LONDON:

http://de.geocities.com/u_london/all-london-map.gif

PARIS:

http://www.frenchculture.com/images/metro_map.gif

TOKYO:

http://de.geocities.com/tok_subway/tokyo-map.gif

Now compare that to Los Angeles:

http://www.urbanrail.net/am/lsan/los-angeles-map.gif

And we're MUCH less centralized than those other world-class cities!!!

The rail system is our city's missing link and that's why I advocate the county issue $20-25 billion in bonds RIGHT NOW...paying them off with a modest tax increase on transportation related taxes, and lobbying Sacramento and Washington for the other $15-25 billion to complete the expansive primarily grade-separated rail system. That's where the transportation focus of Los Angeles County should be for the 21st century.

Incidentally, the pre-final draft of my system has been complete for a few weeks now but technical difficulties (one laptop having hardware problems and lack of access to a scanner) have prevented me from posting it.

........ as long as Los Angeles has cars the freeways are not going anywhere. I always said we can double deck most Local FWYs and have a Train running in the middle. So like this we have both funding's for local FWYs and Light rail being put to good use as one. Like that everyone will be happy and no one has to complaint about paying for a train that they problaly won't use or it coming near their hood .......

Incidentally, I had a friend from Germany come to Los Angeles a couple of weekends ago. He's a world traveler, primarily throughout Europe and Asia and his visit to LA was the first time he had to drive a car in 4-5 years.

Oh and tell Tom McClintok with projected 9-15 mph peak travel times on all major Los Angeles County highways in 2020, global warming, gas increases to the tune of 300% in the past 6 years, and wars for oil the automobile is far from a convenience compared to mass transit to anyone except the affluent living in oxygenated tombs with loads of sunscreen, who government deficits which lead to service cuts don't effect.

Ferney,

The problem with most freeways and why putting trains in the median is not a good idea is that freeways don't serve destinations. People don't get on freeways to get from point A to point B but on their way from point A to point B. The ends of the trip, both before and after the freeway, require surface streets that are best served with direct service buses and rail.

Additionally, waiting in the median of the freeway for the train is undesirable and unhealthy. Just sit at one of the Green Line stations for five minutes inhaling exhaust and listening to the cars to see what I mean.

Finally, and most importantly, the cost of double decking our freeways is likely multiples more than as much as it would require to create an expansive rail system that would cover the city better, and it still would not solve the traffic crisis on our local streets, nor would it make transportation more accessible or convenient to a growing segment of the Los Angeles population that cannot afford to carry two or three car notes just so the parents can get to work and kids to school.

Let me be clear, I don't think that overnight people will be turning in their cars for Metro monthly passes. But I do think we can build a system where the average 3-4 person family in LA proper could live comfortably with just one car in their garage, and, as is the case in almost every major east coast city, a significant portion of the population find a car is less desirable.

You should applaud efforts to do such, if only because it would allow you to continue driving your expensive greenhouse gas causing car in your own little insulated world without having to endure even more traffic. :baeh3:

cool, so i said what do we do while we sit around an wait for our city to build an expansive train network.

nor did i say i was down for the pasedena tunnel. i wish they would just raze the ground and just build it normal.

so i guess we all sit in the same neverending traffic jam for the next 15-2o years till we get some trains that will serve half the city.

as far as grandma sent out on the street while the white devil makes a freeway on her tulips, were do you think the train tracks are going to go. unless all rail in the los angeles basin is subway, we will still need to use our friend eminent domain to make way.

god bless china and there determination, but that would never happen here. if there was a chance for that i would not have made this bitch feast

oh and comparing LA to london or NYC is low, those cities had subways when La was just farm land

Damien,

I completely understand your notion on this matter. Realistically we have to keep Los Angeles moving unfortunately like Botox mentioned we will have to sit and wait and wait. For this magnificent train/Subway to sweep us off our feet and to be consider a Big Boy City like London, Spain, and Tokyo. The question is, what about the "NOW", If your a native Angelo you know we are not all running to the nearest bus stop to go to work or shopping. That's not something we are soooo accustom to here. Yes it might sound silly, but bullshit aside that's how most of Angelinos think. There's always room for improvement don't get me wrong. Until then Angelinos will continue to drive their expensive cars all over the city. Once we have a more safer, reliable form of transportation in this city, not just in 2 or 3 communities. Then expect most Angelinos return to the old days and start to become more Pro Public Transit.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Additionally, waiting in the median of the freeway for the train is undesirable and unhealthy. Just sit at one of the Green Line stations for five minutes inhaling exhaust and listening to the cars to see what I mean.

^^ So what is the difference between this that you mentioned and sitting on a Bus Stop on Wilshire Blvd? On a city street you have a more direct contact with cars, trucks, school busses so that doesn't sound sooooo healthy either!!!! :tongue2:

At the peak of our rail system LA had the more track than any city in the world. We tore it up and put buses on our streets.

And the comparison is intended to point out that every other world class city keeps its people and goods moving by offering the citizens grade-separated rail as a method of transportation - and people use it.

Additionally, I don't advocate we sit around and do nothing. I advocate we all get help build a vast coalition, which should goes beyond partisan lines and take advantage of the current political climate where we’re bogged down in another Middle East intervention that's draining our treasury, facing a global warming crisis, and feeling the 300% increase in gas prices in 6 years in our pocketbooks. I want all of us to lobby our elected officials and fellow neighbors for the allocation of significant funding for the construction of rail.

as far as grandma sent out on the street while the white devil makes a freeway on her tulips, were do you think the train tracks are going to go. unless all rail in the los angeles basin is subway, we will still need to use our friend eminent domain to make way.

Not accurate. If these lines run under, above or even in the median of major streets as I and every other person who has taken the time to put together a line proposal suggests, few if any residences will need to be purchased by the MTA. The only parcels of land that will likely need to be bought are corner locations where the stations would need to be. In the case of subways all that is really needed is a hole in the wall (a la Hollywood/Highland and 7th Street Metro), as the stations are underground. In fact, don't quote me but I don't think one residence will need to be taken via eminent domain for the Expo line. And even if a couple are, that's nothing compared to clearing a 50-yard path of houses for a highway, which displaces hundreds to thousands of people each mile. An Expo freeway, for example, would require clearing every house within 2-4 blocks of Exposition Blvd. There's simply no comparison.

Light rail and heavy rail are meant to compliment communities. That's why property values around them go up around their stations. Ever heard of property values increasing because it is within walking distance of a freeway? Didn't think so.

Until then Angelinos will continue to drive their expensive cars all over the city. Once we have a more safer, reliable form of transportation in this city, not just in 2 or 3 communities. Then expect most Angelinos return to the old days and start to become more Pro Public Transit.

I completely and totally agree. Any increase in taxes or any measures to increase rail transit must provide direct benefits to the entire county (since the county would be voting on it) not just particular corridors. It is a point which I stress time and time again, and I always make a point to reference anytime a politician or editorial is written asking why we should spend $4 billion on a Wilshire subway. We have to put forth a system to the electorate, not individual rail lines.

With respect to waiting, here's how I see it. Subway construction can be 24-7. It's underground and its only really limitation is the earth conditions, which effect how quickly the machine can bore the tunnels. Say we got started on the Wilshire subway with two 9-hour shift crews. I have to believe we could get to the ocean within 3-4 years. Simultaneously how about we use thise whole two 9-hour shift crew idea to start digging the:
-Sepulveda pass tunnel to connect the San Fernando Valley to UCLA.
-Vermont subway (Wilshire/Vermont to Vermont/Gage)
-La Brea/Crenshaw subway (Hollywood/Highland to 67th/Crenshaw)

And if we're simultaneously running 6-hour shifts for the at-grade and elevated portions of these in other lines (only 6-hours because Mayor Antonio says no to rush hour construction), imagine where we could be in 10 years?

The money is there. What we lack is the will and the organization.

So what is the difference between this that you mentioned and sitting on a Bus Stop on Wilshire Blvd? On a city street you have a more direct contact with cars, trucks, school busses so that doesn't sound sooooo healthy either!!!! :tongue2:

I have sat at a bus stop on Wilshire so I do know what you mean. But the exhaust and the noise is still exponentially worse in the median of the 105 freeway.

Instead of fighting each other on which one is the better option, I think we need to seek the middle ground. It's better to have both of them. It's good to have extensive freeway system. It's also good to have extensive rail system. Since our railway system is way behind than that of the freeway, then we need to add more rail lines to make them equal. This way, we'll have the best of both worlds.

I've lived in New York and I can say I really enjoy the subway systems. Only thing is their expressways are too limited. As a result cars use the few boulevards available. Queens Blvd. is known as the boulevard of death. Lots of pedestrians are run over by speeding cars.

In L.A. I love the freeways. You can go anywhere almost instantaneously. Only thing is sometimes I don't way to drive. I just want to go to the office by using the subway. Subways are too few though.

Instead of fighting each other on which one is the better option, I think we need to seek the middle ground. It's better to have both of them. It's good to have extensive freeway system. It's also good to have extensive rail system. Since our railway system is way behind than that of the freeway, then we need to add more rail lines to make them equal. This way, we'll have the best of both worlds.

I've lived in New York and I can say I really enjoy the subway systems. Only thing is their expressways are too limited. As a result cars use the few boulevards available. Queens Blvd. is known as the boulevard of death. Lots of pedestrians are run over by speeding cars.

In L.A. I love the freeways. You can go anywhere almost instantaneously. Only thing is sometimes I don't way to drive. I just want to go to the office by using the subway. Subways are too few though.


thank you, im glad to see one person, be it a non la resedent, seeing that it is not a good thing to just say. no more freeway! rar!

but insted let us still do the things that need to be done, at the same time play with the expansion of rail. i said it in the first post i made on this thread. i would love to take the train to work. but right now its not there... what is there is a over capastiy freeway system that millions depend on everyday.

Someone should step up to the plate and make carpool lanes mandatory in LA County Fwys. So co~workers can carpool to and from work on a daily basis. So you see you will take 2 or 3 cars off the road with this excellent idea. Also to make things even each car register in Los Angeles or better yet the southland should be giving a symbol or number on each license plate register. They should a total of 5 one for each day of the week, not including the weekend. So when ever the day for your symbol comes around you know it's a No No day. Example I would have a Wednesday, I should not be able to drive my car that particular day of the week, year round. Then I would have to find a different means of transportation. I also understand most people have atleast 3 car per home but not all. So what you do is you set a new schedule where you know you have to use Public transportation or carpool on your cars day off. It's a start and basically what your doing is presenting a new life style to Angelinos. Within a couple of months it would just become routine. Oh yea before I forget if you get caught driving on your no service day you will get a $1,000 ticket with no if or butts about it.

So what does everyone think, please share your thoughts!!!!!!

oh and comparing LA to london or NYC is low, those cities had subways when La was just farm land


It's not low when you consider the hundreds of miles of streetcars and urban railways that existed in LA before WWII. While London and Paris expanded their systems, we trashed ours.

Ferney:

im not sure what to think of your plan for salvation. it is interesting but i think it would just be cheaper to build the rail lines.

svs:

its not my fault that the people who lived here in the 5o's thought that one transportation system is the way of the future... hmm that sounds familiar

^^ It was just a brilliant non prejudice way to balance out commuters that are affecting our beautiful City of LA. So let me ask you how is it cheaper than building Rail Lines???

you have to pay for a government program in some way... and you also have to pay to enforce it

Damien after your well thought out responses and comments their really is nothing left to say. The knife in the heart is to see those other cities rail lines and then to see ours. That is just pathetic! I really don't get it. We already have a very extensive freeway system but now we need to concentrate on alternative methods of transport. Why is that so hard to understand?

oh and comparing LA to london or NYC is low, those cities had subways when La was just farm land

And Seoul and Shanghai were just rice paddies as well but look at their systems now.

And their really is no argument left, their was an.....18% increase in ridership over last year. If their was an 18% increase in freeway traffic in just one year you'd see all of these antisocial folks wed to their cars by the gas pump lobbying every politician in the city for more freeways.

One solution to this problem is to heckle Achmadenajad, he'll get mad, make trouble with oil supply, and gasoline will rise up even more. Those gas guzzlers will then switch to subways.

Quoted from SSP on "Worst Commutes":
I usually drive from the LAX area to the Valley and vice versa 3 or 4 times a week. When ever this happens I always drive on La Tijera and take a quick peek @ the 405. If it's a parking lot I drive to Stocker turn right make a left on La Brea to Highland into the 101. I would cut my commute about an hour taking this route. Before I would actually jump on the 405 and not joking around it would take me 1 1/2 just to get to Wilshire. Plus I still had to make over the hill...... Yuck!!!!

Now why in the world wouldn't this person and people like him be mass transit advocates from hell?? I think we all agree this is in no way better than a train but is it even better than a rapid bus? Wake up LA.

One thing though, while looking over the 2006 Long Term Plan, the only freeway plans that the MTA has on its radar are mostly carpool lanes(equivalent to adding more cars to a train) and a few extensions(2 rail extensions are already underway or in serious planning stages). No new freeways are to be built nor does any sane politician even bring that up. Our very own mayor is a mass transit advocate who even takes the train to work, sometimes.
http://www.mta.net/board/Items/2006/05_May/20060503RBMItem45handout.pdf

aperently no one got why i made this...

fernny i guess we will just sit around in traffic untill a train line opens near us that can take us to our destination in 1o years.

as far as the rice patty thing, i would love to see anyone try to do the same thing here. honestly i would. if we could build a complete train system withing one year i would be amazed... but that WILL not happen here

More freeway lanes means more traffic. It encourages people to live far from their jobs, it encourages development farther from centers of work, it lets people believe that something is being done about traffic, so they can drive more.

Short term solutions will require people to re-think there relationship to their cars and communities. Instead of asking for more freeway lanes ask for more pedestrian oriented development in your area. More mixed use, more smaller stores instead of big box retail out on the margins. Start looking for a place to live near where you work or a place to work near where you live. A 50 mile commute is not a birthright of all Angelinos.

The zero commute I now live has made my life a billion times better. Though I don't get to see Sunset through Beverly Hills as often. When I want to get out I go for a walk! there is a lot to see at the pedestrian level.

I still have to drive to get groceries, go to the doctor, visit friends, but this all happens one day a week! Imagine if everyone cut down driving to one day a week, there would be no need for more lanes, in fact we could start rebuiding the neighborhoods that were destroyed to make the Antelope Valley a viable development area.

Freeways provide the illusion of freedom, get out of your cars!

^^ Yes, let's all put our vehicles in our 3 car garages and walk to the nearest Bus Stop. This will solve all LA problem..... Yay!!!!!!!! :cucumber:

right, that is well and good but does not apply to all peoples.

i happen to be a animator by trade, 99.99% of all places i can work at are located in venice, santa monica or hollywood. those places are a no go for me living in. venice and santa monica are way too pricy and i dont like the vast majority of people that live there. and most of hollywood is a dump with tiny overpriced units.

right now i work in sherman oaks, which also is largly overpriced. so i choose san gabriel, masivly comfortable community, great food and cheap ass grocerys. if there were a studio near me, the liklyhood of me being able to work there is slim givin the nature of my industry. so right now i commute by freeway. using the absolutely beautifully 1o freeway west busway. then getting on the 1o1 north. the 1o1 is an ass fuck. it takes me 3o times longer to commute on the small stretch of 1o1 then it does for my entire 1o busway run. that can be improved via HOV. dropping 3/4 of my time. i would love to just sit back and relax on a train reading up how to use fusion but right now that service does not exsist. the closest thing is driving to pasadena then using the yellow to the red and attempting to take a bus from universal to sherman. which fernny has pointed out to me does not exist.

so what is left for someone like me and alot of others? sit around in traffic listening to how some day there will be trains surving half the city, meanwhile i sit on a freeway system that is being for the most part abandon by politicians because its not politically correct to want to improve it.

how shity is that! come on guys! trains had there hayday back in the 3o's freeways had theres in the 5o's. why is it that eveyone seems to want to go back to one saving grace system when we could have to systems running at peek capacity! i dont understand why we cannot build rail and expand our freeway system at the same time. the trains could hand a massive amount of the people on the highway and lane expansion could lower the rush 4 hours to an hour or so. sure lane expansion will not decrees congestion but it will allow more cars to travel the same distance, thus lowering the amount of time all those cars are on the road. im glad to see ridership is up 18% but i dont see a difference. what is that 18% compared to the population growth?

expand rail and highway and subway and we can all be able to traverse this great place with much more ease

my head hurts and i feel like im talking to a pop can.

expand trains
expand freeways
and we will all be happy!

HOV is a workable solution, or some help anyway. But, Tox, what if everyone who lives in Downey and works at McD's in Santa Monica would get real. Then your commute would be a lot better, That's what I am saying, and yes, I know it is a gross over-generalization. If you lived here in the 80's for the Olympics then you remember what a little time-shifting can do for traffic. Some social engineering will go a lot further than more concrete. That is where we are right now.

You never acknowledge that more lanes don't equal less traffic. It wouldn't even help you, what you are begging for.

...highway and lane expansion could lower the rush 4 hours to an hour or so. sure lane expansion will not decrees congestion but it will allow more cars to travel the same distance, thus lowering the amount of time all those cars are on the road...

oh and Tox?

[QUOTE=klamedia]Quoted from SSP on "Worst Commutes":
I usually drive from the LAX area to the Valley and vice versa 3 or 4 times a week. When ever this happens I always drive on La Tijera and take a quick peek @ the 405. If it's a parking lot I drive to Stocker turn right make a left on La Brea to Highland into the 101. I would cut my commute about an hour taking this route. Before I would actually jump on the 405 and not joking around it would take me 1 1/2 just to get to Wilshire. Plus I still had to make over the hill...... Yuck!!!!

^^ Double Wow.......

You see what a Lil navigating on surface street accomplishes. Although this is very common practice for most Angelos.

So the moral of the story is a car is Los Angeles is a necessity, not just a luxury!!!!!

Give me an example how a car is a necessity and not a luxury here? I want proof Ferney!

I keep hearing you guys talk about how there isn't enough stations for people to take bus or how LA dwellers are just not too keen on the idea of "waiting" for bus (while it is acceptable being stuck in traffic). Indeed, it is a difference of lifestyle. Stupid LA people choose to live in the suburbs, often times hours away from any destination, and they complain about how there isn't enough infrastructure like freeways to get them from point A to point B. Come on, the problem is not the infrastructure, the problem is how the city is spread out. Instead of talking about the means of transportation of any kind, the first thing should be re-evaulating your lifestyle. Is it smart to live so far from where you need to be? Some of you have already proven your intellect by investing in Prius, take the next step, and live a bit closer to where it is the most convinient! Live in high density areas and stay away from the 'burbs, and then you'll see (along with all other major metropolis in the world) how such lifestyle can improve your overall quality of life. So yeah, the problem is not about determining the most effective means of transportation (albeit mass transit systems or highway systems), but how do you zone the city in such way that a site can be utilized in different ways while increasing density. Stop building stupid suburban developments which encourages sprawl in which you'll just feel sorry later, and increase density inwardly. And once you have the density, then the mass transit system will develop naturally. You'll have a system which needn't stretch far to serve lots of people in a small metropolitan area. Density and modern zoning regulations is what you need. Stop the sprawl, its so stupid in so many ways...to people who say that its too expensive to live in the city? Consider how cities like HK and Vancouver deals with this issue by raising their heigh restriction so that condos can go up higher and lower the price in general. If you're afraid of earthquakes, modern skyscrapers are actually safer places to be compare to wooden single family homes in the burbs. LA is lagging behind in terms of urban planning. Everyone quotes LA as a bad example of how a city can go wrong. LA is the second biggest city in the states and one of the most populous in the world, and yet it is so behind, its sad!

Here are a few(K)

> Grocery Shopping
> Move cargo for my dad (Valley)
> Go out on a hot date
> Take my uncle to his Dr. Appt's
> Cruise The Sunset Strip
> Get to work (When ever that is)
> Drive to Vegas (Pleasure)
> Drive to San Diego (Business)
> Drive to Santa Barbara (Sex)
> Not get wet when it rains
> Chill with the A/C in the summer
> Go to the outlets in Camarillo/Ontario Mills
> Visit friends across Town and able to make it home for dinner

> Should I countinue?

...is san gabriel the burbs?

Please Please Please Please!!! Read the 2006 Long Range Transit Plan by LA's finest, the MTA. It will tell you what they are working on. Carpool lanes are in! Building more freeways are out! All things rail are in! A new on-ramp to get you to Majic Mountain is in!

Why are we continually discussing this subject!! It's not like LA is that unique of a place that it can go without a sturdy mass transit system like everywhere else! That's like saying "My house is so tight, it don't need plumbing"! Stop the mothafuckin' insanity. Build a goddamm subway, grade seperated, heavy, light, aerial, subterranian, 3 car, 4 car, 10 car train, federally funded or local taxed system that spans the county and be fucking done with it! Shit! This is not hard to fucking understand! I mean Ferney just talked about taking 4 major arteries and a freeway just to go approx. 20 miles and still wasn't at the destination. I never have to take 4 trains or busses to go anywhere. This thread shouldn't be called "transportation" it should be called "why does LA think it can get away with being half assed?" The fucked up thing about it is that those cities mentioned (New York, Tokyo) all have pretty extensive freeway/tollway systems already in place in addition to their magnanemous rail systems. I love you all, but this is some stupid shit to still be debating this late in the game. We should be debating on how best to convince people to get out of their cars and give mass transit a try! If you really love this city like you say you do and want to see it take its place in the top tier cities of the world, you would do everything in your power to push for more rapid transit in this city. And that means getting out there and getting involved.

I keep hearing you guys talk about how there isn't enough stations for people to take bus or how LA dwellers are just not too keen on the idea of "waiting" for bus (while it is acceptable being stuck in traffic). Indeed, it is a difference of lifestyle. Stupid LA people choose to live in the suburbs, often times hours away from any destination, and they complain about how there isn't enough infrastructure like freeways to get them from point A to point B. Come on, the problem is not the infrastructure, the problem is how the city is spread out. Instead of talking about the means of transportation of any kind, the first thing should be re-evaulating your lifestyle. Is it smart to live so far from where you need to be? Some of you have already proven your intellect by investing in Prius, take the next step, and live a bit closer to where it is the most convinient! Live in high density areas and stay away from the 'burbs, and then you'll see (along with all other major metropolis in the world) how such lifestyle can improve your overall quality of life. So yeah, the problem is not about determining the most effective means of transportation (albeit mass transit systems or highway systems), but how do you zone the city in such way that a site can be utilized in different ways while increasing density. Stop building stupid suburban developments which encourages sprawl in which you'll just feel sorry later, and increase density inwardly. And once you have the density, then the mass transit system will develop naturally. You'll have a system which needn't stretch far to serve lots of people in a small metropolitan area. Density and modern zoning regulations is what you need. Stop the sprawl, its so stupid in so many ways...to people who say that its too expensive to live in the city? Consider how cities like HK and Vancouver deals with this issue by raising their heigh restriction so that condos can go up higher and lower the price in general. If you're afraid of earthquakes, modern skyscrapers are actually safer places to be compare to wooden single family homes in the burbs. LA is lagging behind in terms of urban planning. Everyone quotes LA as a bad example of how a city can go wrong. LA is the second biggest city in the states and one of the most populous in the world, and yet it is so behind, its sad!



^^ It's easier said than done for one!

So your saying that If I live in San Dimas and work in Downtown LA. For me to get up and move so I would stop bitchin about the infrastracture on our Fwys. So say my 2,800 sq ft lovely home cost me 150K 5 years ago. I should sell it and move to a 1,000sq ft apartment in the city and pay a $5,000 mortgage plus HOA, right? Just because I'm a stupid LA person who choose to live in a home on the burbs and continue to work in the city!!!!

...how do i take a train from san gabriel to sherman oaks?


that is without sitting in a bus that takes me longer to arrive at my destination then my auto

and i have read your pdf. its interesting and fun and only mentions a few hov lanes thrown about. i see there is a plan for the silver line... thus my signature

but thats all i see on the freeway side while we go hog wild on the train side. good to see, but why only trains? seriously i think every highway in tokyo is double decker and and is still expanding its freeway system, the Ken-O Expressway along with more construction on top of that.

but what ever no one cares about freeways anymore and i dont have another option so i think im done now... unless theres something to respond to

Why are we continually discussing this subject!!

I love you all, but this is some stupid shit to still be debating this late in the game. We should be debating on how best to convince people to get out of their cars and give mass transit a try! If you really love this city like you say you do and want to see it take its place in the top tier cities of the world, you would do everything in your power to push for more rapid transit in this city. And that means getting out there and getting involved.

(K) this is a discussion board, I'm just responding to the personal attacks, I wont mention usernames. Every thread that start off with infrastructure, sprawl, world class city, Fwys, not having enough trains, nimbys and whatnot. We always end up with the same discussions and complaints. We need to stop talking about and go out there and make a change. If you took the time to read the post I responded to, regarding you had gone to a meeting (Downtown). I suggested that for the upcoming meeting in August, I believe. For us to have an SSC LA meet on the same day. So we can tackle two things on the same day. No one responded and it shows how much everyone here gives a shit about our city. Even I am willing to step up to the plate and have my arm twisted for more transit and open space and whatnot. It seems most Angelinos on SSC are like insecure about their looks or something they are the biggest flakes. So when I see them typing about the changes they want and then turn around and do absolutely nothing to change it is a let down.......

Can I WOO!WOO!!!!!

The few folks I heard from are too scared of a double-decker freeway since that 1987 earthquake up in SF. I don't know the details... do we have a construction method now that will keep one of those standing in a major earthquake?

^^ It's easier said than done for one!

So your saying that If I live in San Dimas and work in Downtown LA. For me to get up and move so I would stop bitchin about the infrastracture on our Fwys. So say my 2,800 sq ft lovely home cost me 150K 5 years ago. I should sell it and move to a 1,000sq ft apartment in the city and pay a $5,000 mortgage plus HOA, right? Just because I'm a stupid LA person who choose to live in a home on the burbs and continue to work in the city!!!!

Just because you have a "2,800 sq ft lovely home" doesn't mean you have the time to enjoy it while you're making that hour+ commute getting stuck in traffic ever-so-often. And yeah, the money thing you're pretty much screwd even if you don't live in LA. Houses are expensive across the board. The change should be in the way the city is planned so that you encourage density without sacrificing affordability, and it can be done.

In short, increase density,stop the sprawl, and people can get to where ever they need to without much effort.

Density will also make subways(or any sort of mass transit) cheaper and sustanable and closer to people.

I wont mention usernames.

is it me?:?:

The few folks I heard from are too scared of a double-decker freeway since that 1987 earthquake up in SF. I don't know the details... do we have a construction method now that will keep one of those standing in a major earthquake?

tokyo must so there is a technology out there
also mexico city

but what ever no one cares about freeways anymore and i dont have another option so i think im done now... unless theres something to respond to


^^:pet: What are you talking about Botox........ Everyone knows that LA Fwys are vains of the city and Downtown the heart.


:weirdo:

The few folks I heard from are too scared of a double-decker freeway since that 1987 earthquake up in SF. I don't know the details... do we have a construction method now that will keep one of those standing in a major earthquake?



^^ What's your take on the matter???

if they can have ramps a hundred feet in the air like the Harbor/Century interchange then they can do anything.

^^ What's your take on the matter???

No fence-sitting around here, I see. :)

If the road deck isn't going to smash me like a bug if that long-awaited 8.0 ever shows up, I think it's something that ought to be seriously considered. Maybe just as dedicated HOV and/or bus lanes. I'm rather partial to light rail, however.

I say this as a person who does not own a car, and gets around mostly by bus. But I don't think most people are going to look too hard at getting out of the car until gas hits $5+.

^^give me a silver line and my car goes back to carmax

Let's not forget that our dearly departed planning gurus of the 40's and 50's planned the LA area with the car as the major means of transport. LA was supposedly the post war "model" of the city of the future. It made sense at that time since gas was cheap, cars became affordable to the middle class, population growth was manageable and there was so much raw land to develop. The plan was to create multiple-downtowns (Downtown LA, Century City, Warner Center, Marina del rey) and surround these areas with suburban tracts. They wanted to connect each "Center" with a commuter rail line which as we know never materialized, instead we have these ribbon of freeways....most developers tried to attract house/land buyers with the catch phrase "freeway adjacent." This is where we are right now still dependent on the car not because we have no choice but because it's been part of our culture for generations and worst, we are still in denial about the gridlock that is slowly choking us to death!

The opposite happened in New York City, the subway lines had been around for decades even before Ford's Model T came into production. So the car was a non-factor in the way NYC was developed. They were into TOD's generations ahead of LA and walking and the use of mass transit had been part of their culture as well. The complexity of the problem lies in the fact that our planners today have been asking the Angeleno to change our habits and forgo our love affair with the car. It will not happen overnight but will take at least one or two generations to change. Whenever I ride the rails, it's good to see young people using the system. This is the new generation that hopefully will change LA's relationship with the car. It's about time we started a new love affair!

close... but not yet

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a22/godblessbotox/Untitled-3.jpg

I think you are right that it will take a generation. Many home owners are literally deeply invested in the system as it stands. We will see more change as those homes are turned over and replaced with mortgages that match current market values. Life in the Suburbs will no longer be cheaper. In the mean time the many centers of our city are densifying and urbanizing and filling with young professionals (yuppies!) who will mature into a normal population distribution, families, school age children, retired.

All this will happen before you know, the blink of an eye.

Planners know this is happening and are encouraging it. Transit is one of the tools they use to do it, and higher density building codes for near transit areas. The mayor campaigned on the idea. The bonus for local government is booming tax revenues, leading to more transit, more schools, more police, more social services, leading to more attractive neighborhoods, more increases in property values, more redevelopment, more jobs . . . more people.

This sort of boom hasn't happened in LA in my memory, but the history of LA is a series of real estate booms. Originally working out from the center through the years. This is different because it is starting all over in the center (centers, now) again. We will see the history of LA re-enacted but this time in high rise urban development instead of our infamous sprawl.

Los Angeles has changed for good. The world still thinks it is 1970 in LA but we are way out ahead of that and there is no stopping it now. In 30 years LA will be unrecognizable, in 60 completely transformed. That is how long it takes, the blink of an eye, believe me.

Let's not forget that our dearly departed planning gurus of the 40's and 50's planned the LA area with the car as the major means of transport. LA was supposedly the post war "model" of the city of the future. It made sense at that time since gas was cheap, cars became affordable to the middle class, population growth was manageable and there was so much raw land to develop. The plan was to create multiple-downtowns (Downtown LA, Century City, Warner Center, Marina del rey) and surround these areas with suburban tracts. They wanted to connect each "Center" with a commuter rail line which as we know never materialized, instead we have these ribbon of freeways....most developers tried to attract house/land buyers with the catch phrase "freeway adjacent." This is where we are right now still dependent on the car not because we have no choice but because it's been part of our culture for generations and worst, we are still in denial about the gridlock that is slowly choking us to death!

The opposite happened in New York City, the subway lines had been around for decades even before Ford's Model T came into production. So the car was a non-factor in the way NYC was developed. They were into TOD's generations ahead of LA and walking and the use of mass transit had been part of their culture as well. The complexity of the problem lies in the fact that our planners today have been asking the Angeleno to change our habits and forgo our love affair with the car. It will not happen overnight but will take at least one or two generations to change. Whenever I ride the rails, it's good to see young people using the system. This is the new generation that hopefully will change LA's relationship with the car. It's about time we started a new love affair!

yes, finally something intelligent. I enjoy the history lesson and agree completely!

timquinn's positive prediction about the future of LA brings hope. My decision to purchase a condo in the south LA area have been affirmed.

Three points:

1) People in suburbs can and likely will still use their cars, primarily because it's impossible to live in the suburbs without a car. The communities are horribly planned. The question is to what extent will they use their cars? A small low-density city like San Dimas can handle having San Dimas residents' cars on San Dimas' streets. The problem arises when San Dimas cars pollute Santa Monica streets.

The ideal transportation system connects the suburbs to the urban core by commuter rail (Metrolink) with stations every 2-4 miles to compliment the urban heavy and light rail system. So the commute of a San Dimas resident who works in Santa Monica would consist of driving/taking the bus/getting dropped off at the San Dimas Metrolink station, catching the grade-separated electrified train, which would come every 15-20 minutes during peak hours and run 75-90 mph between stations until it arrives at Union Station. From there the resident would transfer to a subway or light rail line that would get them to/near their Santa Monica job.

2) Transportation funding is limited, and even if it weren't we shouldn't be wasting taxpayer dollars. Knowing this, why spend the people's money exacerbating the traffic crisis (adding lanes to a freeway), instead of investing in a solution (grade-separated light and heavy rail)? I'm on the record

3) Anyone caught a glimpse of the new 405 carpool lane? Guess what? When the 405 is backed up so too is the carpool lane. There are just too many cars on the 405 and a couple of carpool lanes aren't going to solve the problem.

Let me be clear, I support the creation of carpool lanes, I think the 710 tunnel should be built and I believe a lot of freeway junctions in Southern California need serious improvements. But I also know that grade-separated rail has the capacity to move at least 15 times as many people per hour and farther than a freeway, and I recognize that expanding the length of platforms, adding cars to trains, and increasing headways is a lot simpler and significantly cheaper than widening a freeway. So, in addition to offering commuters a defined transportation time, and being cleaner for the environment, and all the many other reasons to support the construction of rail over freeway expansion, rail is a more effective and flexible mode of transportation than freeways.

yes, finally something intelligent. I enjoy the history lesson and agree completely!

timquinn's positive prediction about the future of LA brings hope. My decision to purchase a condo in the south LA area have been affirmed.


"archd", "tim" and now "jerai" comments are like salve to a wound for me. I know I'm not krazy! But why can't everyone else see that densification in LA proper is happening all around them. On my way to work I take the 304 down Sunset to Union Station. It seems like every empty parcel of land is being cleared for some sort of dense looking development. Also many, many more people are using the rail line for at least some of their errands, hey it's a start. And like "tim" said, things will and are happening fast. So when I hear comments like "jerai" first reply, that's not quite the LA that I know.

close... but not yet

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a22/godblessbotox/Untitled-3.jpg

Something is wrong here. Why is their a 36 minute wait for the train?? I've never waited 36 minutes for a train particularly the Red Line. You are also traveling very late at night. If you are traveling this late, fuck it and drive. But if this were a normal afternoon, it looks as if your trip would only take you an hour, you would not be stuck in traffic and you'd save a hellavu lot of money. Is this not acceptable?

$14 is the driving cost according to AAA. That's how much an all access metro pass is for a week!
Oh shit! No it's really $28 since I'm sure you'd like to get back home. In rush, I doubt you could make it by car in much less time.

close... but not yet

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a22/godblessbotox/Untitled-3.jpg

In my proposed Metro system you'd leave the Aqua Line Del Mar/Valley Station transfer to the Red Line then transfer to the Gold Line, departing at the Ventura/Woodman Station. Or you'd take the express route by driving down to/taking the bus to/getting dropped off at the Rosemead Metrolink station to catch the Riverside or San Bernardino Metrolink to Union Station, where you'd transfer to either the Ventura County or Antelope Valley Metrolink to the Burbank Media Center station and transfer to the Gold Line, again departing at the Ventura/Woodman station.

^^ screw that weres the silver line! i would have to walk a block to the train station,

oh and GOD DANMIT, that was supposed to be am not pm... let me re-evaluate my standing

what the fuck is wronge with the mta website... i hit arive by 1o.3o am and it lists things happening at night

alright just do the opposite of what i did the first time, so its and hour and 23 min insted of 38

^^ screw that weres the silver line! i would have to walk a block to the train station,

oh and GOD DANMIT, that was supposed to be am not pm... let me re-evaluate my standing

Even when the Silver Line is built it may not be just a block away from you. I used to walk 5-6 blocks to the nearest train from my house in NYC, would this not be acceptable for you? If it is you should probably stick with your car.

Hold up! I'm trying to figure out where you live now. Isn't the El Monte busway near you? I google mapped you but are you in San Gabriel or Alhambra? If you are in SG take the El Monte to US and catch the Red Line??

looking at the mta pdf that you are preaching for everyone to read it shows the silverline basically using a union pacific rail line, or running close to it. hell i would walk to the bus station near san gabriel square if i could get to work in a decent time.

as far as the driving to union station, sorry thats kind of lame. i use the busway everyday. its incredible, which is why i want freeway upgrading not thrown off a cliff, and to stop at union station and then park my car all day to take a train to sherman oaks... thats kinda of more inconvenient then siting or our stupid freeways. hell i could just drive to the yellow line aswell but i dont want to go out of the way to get to work? is this unreasonable?

^^ Then your better off keeping your driving routine. As far as the Silver Line, don't hold your breath on that one. Your most likely to move into the Central City area or the Valley if you continue with your job.......

see thats the fun part... average job duration doing what i do is 6 months to a year... then your somewere else... like maybe santa monica. so do i move everytime my job changes or do i settle into an area that i really enjoy

go silver line go!!!

^^ In that case your better off moving somewhere Central with many options of Fwys & Transit. So what ever the outcome is, your only source of commuting to and from work won't be your car from "carmax". Besides What are the chances of getting transfer to jobs in your field in the SGV. So the choice is yours, Botox!

not transfers. new jobs. anyhow monica is annoying, hollywood is dirty tiny and overpriced, koreatown is... not my thing and i fucking hate silverlake. not said to elicit emotions from the people who live there, i just dont like them. san gabriel it is, and will be for a long time. but i thought this was transportation?

oh and i enjoy my hyundai from the walmart of car dealers, and there is always the shitbrick vw

^^ It's still about transportation.......... I just wanted to chip in since it seemed you were bitchin about your commute!!!!! :)

no i was bitchin about the no mans land of highways... but i think everyone else has abandon this tread since this will mark the 7th in the back and forth between us... yay

Could this be finally happening!! Feasibility studies on not just one rail project(Red Line to the ocean) but 3, downtown connector, east/west link between the valleys and of course the subway to the sea!!

what valleys?

LA definitely needs more subway lines. The traffic is critical.

oh my... did anyone watch the channel 4 news today. the story about the 91/60/215 construction?

I for one missed it, care to enlighten us please? :)

i fucking hate silverlake. i just dont like them.

.......and just to think, I thought you were my friend! :badnews:

^^ jesus that was an old one... were did i put that?

anyhow... some dude is bitchin up a storm in riverside because of the interchange improvements. he does not like the construction noises. also he is complaining about how it will increase smog and dirt in the area. i would agree that his comments are justified except for one thing... that interchange has been there for a while. its not like they just put it up. he knowingly moved right next to the interchange and is now complaining about it. maybe im just over reacting to this man... but i think hes a fucking idiot

not transfers. new jobs. anyhow monica is annoying, hollywood is dirty tiny and overpriced, koreatown is... not my thing and i fucking hate silverlake. not said to elicit emotions from the people who live there, i just dont like them.

qoute the whole thing mr...

everyone know about this website?
http://trafficinfo.lacity.org/
kinda interesting

http://www.cityrailtransit.com/america/los_angeles_metro.gif

^ congrats on finding the sloppiest and most inaccurate map of LA's transportation ever made. The Green Line is technically light rail, and Angel's Flight has been closed down for years. Also, there are a lot of station names wrong.

did not want to make a new tread for this so i revived the transportation thread.

does anyone know of any auto shop directories with customer reviews? all i could find is city search and that did not seem like it had too many opinions on it and was not very intuitively layed out.

im having an auto nightmare with the place i went to recently

Nope!

Donate your car to some charity and go buy another.....

no the car is fine... the repair shop sucks the ass

^ congrats on finding the sloppiest and most inaccurate map of LA's transportation ever made. The Green Line is technically light rail, and Angel's Flight has been closed down for years. Also, there are a lot of station names wrong.

Aside from Angels Flight and classifiying the Green Line in the wrong category, there's nothing wrong with the map. Which stations have wrong names? And unlike the official Metro Rail map, this one is actually to scale.

did not want to make a new tread for this so i revived the transportation thread.

does anyone know of any auto shop directories with customer reviews? all i could find is city search and that did not seem like it had too many opinions on it and was not very intuitively layed out.

im having an auto nightmare with the place i went to recently


Did you try Angie's List? I don't know if they have auto repair on there...

Bus pass, anyone?

Bus pass, anyone?




^^ Me..... Meeeeee!:banana:

interesting stuff about the 5


"The Mini-Study looked at impacts from planned improvements to I-5 as well as to the I-710
in the study area. For the first time, both planning efforts were brought fully together. As
requested by the communities, an option for elevated HOV lanes on the I-5 was examined.
This option was found to be feasible and to protect many of the properties that would be
impacted by an at-grade HOV lane. The two communities both agreed that this recommendation
is worthy of further study, but questions remain about impacts of this option and about
where the HOV lanes would start and terminate. The study also indicates that two of the I-
5 interchanges, Washington Boulevard and Bandini Boulevard, will require improvements to
safely accommodate truck traffic."

celebraite freedom! [says caltrans]

http://www.dot.ca.gov/interstate/

50 years of state highways.
http://www.dot.ca.gov/interstate/images/94-00670-32EarlyRoad.jpg
http://www.dot.ca.gov/interstate/images/11SD8-1910-noneg.jpg
http://www.dot.ca.gov/interstate/images/41.jpg
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/paffairs/images/fourlev1.jpg

just for fun...

Report: 98 Percent Of U.S. Commuters Favor Public Transportation For Others
November 29, 2000 | Issue 36•43

WASHINGTON, DC–A study released Monday by the American Public Transportation Association reveals that 98 percent of Americans support the use of mass transit by others.

With traffic congestion, pollution, and oil shortages all getting worse, now is the time to shift to affordable, efficient public transportation," APTA director Howard Collier said. "Fortunately, as this report shows, Americans have finally recognized the need for everyone else to do exactly that."

Of the study's 5,200 participants, 44 percent cited faster commutes as the primary reason to expand public transportation, followed closely by shorter lines at the gas station. Environmental and energy concerns ranked a distant third and fourth, respectively.

Anaheim, CA, resident Lance Holland, who drives 80 miles a day to his job in downtown Los Angeles, was among the proponents of public transit.

"Expanding mass transit isn't just a good idea, it's a necessity," Holland said. "My drive to work is unbelievable. I spend more than two hours stuck in 12 lanes of traffic. It's about time somebody did something to get some of these other cars off the road."

Public support for mass transit will naturally lead to its expansion and improvement, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials said.

"With everyone behind it, we'll be able to expand bus routes, create park-and-ride programs, and build entire new Metrolink commuter-rail lines," LACMTA president Howard Sager said. "It's almost a shame I don't know anyone who will be using these new services."

Sager said he expects wide-scale expansion of safe, efficient, and economical mass-transit systems to reduce traffic congestion in all major metropolitan areas in the coming decades.

Improving public transportation will do a great deal of good, creating jobs, revitalizing downtown areas, and reducing pollution," Sager said. "It also means a lot to me personally, as it should cut 20 to 25 minutes off my morning drive."

The APTA study also noted that of the 98 percent of Americans who drive to work, 94 percent are the sole occupant of their automobile.

"When public transportation is not practical, commuters should at least be carpooling," Collier said. "Most people, unlike me, probably work near someone they know and don't need to be driving alone."

Collier said he hopes the study serves as a wake-up call to Americans. In conjunction with its release, the APTA is kicking off a campaign to promote mass transit with the slogan, "Take The Bus... I'll Be Glad You Did."

The campaign is intended to de-emphasize the inconvenience and social stigma associated with using public transportation, focusing instead on the positives. Among these positives: the health benefits of getting fresh air while waiting at the bus stop, the chance to meet interesting people from a diverse array of low-paying service-sector jobs, and the opportunity to learn new languages by reading subway ads written in Spanish.

"People need to realize that public transportation isn't just for some poor sucker to take to work," Collier said. "He should also be taking it to the shopping mall, the supermarket, and the laundromat."

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/38644

That's from 6 years ago

That's from 6 years ago
Exactly! Alot has changed in 6 years. Never thought we would see this headline:


Beverly Hills doesn't want to miss the subway

ha ha

For those of us who sometimes take the Green to the Blue to the Red configuration, I just hobbled that and instead of taking the Blue I took the Harbor Transitway 450X bus. Much faster! It's faster than driving because the Green Line passes up all the cars during rush heading east along the 105(even the carpoolers), then the 450X passes up everyone once again running along the HTWay and then the Red Line of course goes under everyone. This is most effective during rush, wherein outside of rush driving or taking the FlyAway would be faster.

thanks for the 411!

i considered the flyaway for about 15 min for my holiday flights but decided that if i am going to return to a car that does not start. i would rather it did not start in my parking space rather then the flyaway one

For those of us who sometimes take the Green to the Blue to the Red configuration, I just hobbled that and instead of taking the Blue I took the Harbor Transitway 450X bus. Much faster! It's faster than driving because the Green Line passes up all the cars during rush heading east along the 105(even the carpoolers), then the 450X passes up everyone once again running along the HTWay and then the Red Line of course goes under everyone. This is most effective during rush, wherein outside of rush driving or taking the FlyAway would be faster.



^^ Wow.... even the "Carpool Lanes" Huh?

The only problem is the tranfers, especially since the 450x only runs every 30 minutes I believe. When I used to live by the airport and my job took me to Universal City, I would take the Green to the 450 to the Red and it was just over an hour each way. I did the drive on occassion as well and it wasnt much shorter. The 450x is much faster than the blue line, but it does cost an extra dollar to ride over the regular fare, even if you have a day pass.

I would only use this configuration during rush. During this time is it only competitive to the auto. During rush the 450X runs every 10 minutes, not bad.

They must have increased service since the last time i used it in september. I know there are probably 4 or 5 lines that use the harbor transitway, but maybe demand is high enough now for the 450x to run more often now. It was never 100% full when I rode it, but it was always atleast 2/3 full.

Perhaps. The only way I found out that it even existed was from the big push the MTA gave it starting at about 4-5 months ago. The ads were everywhere so I decided to give it a try but once again this is only an alignment that I would use during rush. This is a diamond once converted to rail.

Is 450X a Rapid Bus????

Quote:
Originally Posted by mta summer 2006 newsletter
"The Mini-Study looked at impacts from planned improvements to I-5 as well as to the I-710
in the study area. For the first time, both planning efforts were brought fully together. As
requested by the communities, an option for elevated HOV lanes on the I-5 was examined.
This option was found to be feasible and to protect many of the properties that would be
impacted by an at-grade HOV lane. The two communities both agreed that this recommendation
is worthy of further study, but questions remain about impacts of this option and about
where the HOV lanes would start and terminate. The study also indicates that two of the I-
5 interchanges, Washington Boulevard and Bandini Boulevard, will require improvements to
safely accommodate truck traffic."


Yay....hopefully the MTA uses this as an alternative to knocking down thousands of homes along the 5 from the OC all the way to East LA......it would cost sooo much to buy up the properties along the freeway especially the million dollar homes in North Downey.....besides....i like the sound of an elevated HOV lane.....sorta like the 110 but to a lesser degree i think......hopefully it pans out.

Is 450X a Rapid Bus????

All "400" number bus lines are Express Buses.
"400"-number lines with the letter "X" on the end are branded "Metro Express", run in rush-hour schedules and have buses painted in periwinkle blue.

Rapid Buses all have "700" number lines and are painted red.

So to answer your question, the 450X line is not a Rapid Bus.

All "400" number bus lines are Express Buses.
"400"-number lines with the letter "X" on the end are branded "Metro Express", run in rush-hour schedules and have buses painted in periwinkle blue.

Rapid Buses all have "700" number lines and are painted red.

So to answer your question, the 450X line is not a Rapid Bus.


^ Well..... Thank you soooooooo much*

Transit on the cheap
Valley busway breakdown exposes MTA's shortcomingsArticle Last Updated:12/13/2006 06:52:49 PM PST


IT was inevitable that the pavement under the heavily used Orange Line busway would wear out eventually, especially considering the popularity of the 14-mile east-west transit line.

But having that happen after just 14 months is not a sign of normal wear and tear.

Indeed, it's a sign that something is very wrong. Clearly, the MTA isn't overseeing the contractors or the process of maintaining this vital transit link.

The contractor insists that the uneven surface and bump in the east end of the busway isn't the company's fault. Of course, the MTA says it's not at fault either.

Frankly, the 21,000 commuters who rely on the busway every day probably don't care whose fault it is, so long as the deterioration is fixed and the line maintained.

When Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials are planning to spend billions on a subway and rail lines in other corners of the region, they must not forget the San Fernando Valley and the Orange Line.

The Valley, which has paid a fortune for the rest of the city's rail and subway lines, got scraps back in return.

At the vert least, maintaining this heavily used, highly popular - and cheap - project should be one of our local


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
leaders' top priorities.
Or maybe it's time that the Valley pushed to the front of the line for a light-rail upgrade - one that won't, we assume, begin to crumble after just one year in service.


Just to think these m'fuckas could have had a subway already.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Those fucks!!!! God I hate the valley!!!!!

Or maybe it's time that the Valley pushed to the front of the line for a light-rail upgrade - one that won't, we assume, begin to crumble after just one year in service.


The So-Called "Orange Line" (I refuse to recognize this as a legitimate colored rapid transit line) as a busway is entirely the fault of Valley NIMBYs and County Supervisor Mike Antonovich. The light rail infrastructures of the Blue, Green and Gold Lines are built to last 50 years before a major overhaul. I laugh every time I see that silver bus trundle along. Fortunately it's possible to run a modified-route busway while building a real light rail line along its route. The ultra-lame busway experiment has failed, never again!

Secede, already!!

Secede, already!!

Uhhhh, that won't make a difference since the MTA's transit projects are funded *countywide*

Besides, they tried, in 2002, and failed.

Uhhhh, that won't make a difference since the MTA's transit projects are funded *countywide*

Besides, they tried, in 2002, and failed.


My vote made a difference on this matter....

It was a joke.......

L.A., Long Ruled by Cars, Becoming a Transit Leader
Evolving Region Pushes for More Rail LinesBy John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, December 17, 2006; Page A03

LOS ANGELES -- Demeaned as a car-crazed megalopolis where people drive two blocks to valet-park at the dry cleaners, Los Angeles is on the road to fashioning one of the best public transit systems in the nation.
Los Angeles is No. 2 in the nation in bus ridership and No. 3 in light rail, according to industry statistics. Since 1993, it and Detroit are the only major metropolitan regions in the nation that have succeeded in lowering the annual hours of delay per traveler. In October, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) named Los Angeles County's Mass Transportation Authority the best public transportation system in the country -- truly a man-bites-dog turnaround for an agency that for years was known for incompetence and shady deals. Other cities interested in expanding their public transit systems, notably Atlanta and Tampa, are even studying Los Angeles.



Workers watch in 1997 as a machine carves away the last bit of earth between subway tunnels linking Los Angeles to the San Fernando Valley. (By Susan Sterner -- Associated Press)






Meanwhile, the District's Metro system recently lured the MTA's highly respected second-in-command, John B. Catoe Jr., to Washington to run that agency. And in November, voters in California approved the biggest infrastructure bond package in U.S. history, which will provide the MTA at least $2 billion to continue to build the system, thanks to lobbying from Los Angeles's determined mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa (D).

"The untold secret about L.A. is while it's known for its freeways and for the attitude that the highway is king, it has -- in fits and starts -- begun to piece together a world-class mass transit system," said APTA President William W. Millar. "This is an enormous change."

To be sure, the car still rules in Los Angeles, and the APTA's award appears to be not so much for the system that is -- a motley collection of buses, subways and light rail -- than for what will be. (It took this reporter two hours to travel 20 miles on three buses to interview the mayor on a recent Friday.) I'm wondering where this reporter was traveling from?
Only 6.6 percent of the workforce in this region uses public transit to get to work. Each day, automobiles on Los Angeles's freeways travel 136 million miles -- tops in the nation and four times as many as in the Washington region, according to the Texas Transportation Institute. Commuters here spend more time caught in traffic jams than those in any other city in the country -- almost four days and nights per person per year, burning 407 million excess gallons of gas in delays that cost $11 billion, 50 percent more than in the runner-up, New York.

Los Angeles is known throughout the world as 100 suburbs looking for a city. But although it lacks the downtown core of a Manhattan or a Washington, it is hemmed in by mountains and the Pacific Ocean, and it has evolved into the most densely populated urban region in the nation, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

This "dense sprawl," as it is known in the argot of urban planners, has helped shift public opinion toward support for public transportation. Roger Moliere, who heads the MTA's real estate development business, speaks of a "paradigm shift" in the way Angelenos view mass transit. Real estate ads now regularly use proximity to transit as a selling point. Developers are eager to build near transit stops; currently there are 25 such projects, involving more than $4 billion, across the region, Moliere said.
"Places that 10 to 20 years ago said they didn't want mass transit are now clamoring for it yesterday," said Jaime de la Vega, the city's deputy mayor in charge of transportation.

Work is continuing on a six-mile extension of the Yellow Line we don't have a fucking Yellow Line-- a light-rail route running from Pasadena to downtown -- into East Los Angeles, a predominantly Latino area. Construction has just begun on the Exposition Line, which will link downtown with the University of Southern California and Culver City on the Westside. Also on the books is a downtown subway system that will connect two light-rail systems and the city's lone subway line, which were never joined because of shoddy planning.

"When this thing was planned out, it wasn't planned out in a way that allowed people to connect between lines," Villaraigosa said. "We're going to fix that."

But the Holy Grail for Villaraigosa and others in the city administration is what he calls a "subway to the sea" that would run under Wilshire Boulevard, one of the most heavily traveled avenues in the nation, and bond the Westside with the rest of the region.
Estimated to cost a whopping $350 million per mile, the 13-mile subway, named the Purple Line, was long considered impossible. In 1985, a building blew up on Wilshire Boulevard after subway tunneling hit a methane pocket. That prompted Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) to write legislation banning the use of federal funds for subway construction in a 400-square-block area -- a move that many here saw as a ploy by Waxman's constituents on the richer, whiter Westside to stop mass transit from bringing the poor into their part of town.

But now, forced by gridlock, Waxman and his well-heeled constituents have dropped their opposition, and Congress is expected to change the law next year.



Workers watch in 1997 as a machine carves away the last bit of earth between subway tunnels linking Los Angeles to the San Fernando Valley. (By Susan Sterner -- Associated Press)





Villaraigosa said he plans to lobby Congress aggressively for federal funds to bankroll his dream. "We want to rethink what the city looks like," he said, "to focus on a new urbanism that makes transit-oriented development and mixed-use development the future of L.A."

Lucille Rawls, 50, a data-entry technician, is a believer in the mayor's vision. She's been riding Los Angeles's buses for years and is also a fan of the short subway line. "It's funny," she said after spending 90 minutes to go nine miles downtown. "I have some rich friends, and none of them know about the improving system. But my poor friends can't do without it."

For many years, it did not seem that Los Angeles could ever build a mass transit system. From 1948 to 1980, at least six plans including some form of rail transit were placed before voters and failed. But in 1980, voters in the county passed propositions for a subway, a light-rail line to Long Beach and lower bus fares. Cost overruns turned the Red Line, the city's 17.4-mile subway line, into the most expensive subway system ever. It is the only one in the United States that runs on the honor system.

Problems have been plentiful. Eighty-one people have died in accidents involving Blue Line trains along the 22-mile light-rail system to Long Beach, the most of any light-rail system in the country, since it opened in 1990. A sinkhole opened on Hollywood Boulevard, and more than 2,000 feet of a subway tunnel was found to be half the required thickness. Wags dubbed the MTA the "Money Train Authority" and called its plush new headquarters at Gateway Plaza near Chinatown the "Taj Mahal." In 1998, voters, fed up with waste, approved a ballot measure barring the use of sales tax revenue for tunneling.

"But all this is changing, because we realized that the status quo was unworkable," Villaraigosa said, noting that the management of the MTA has been overhauled.

In a sense, Los Angeles is returning to its roots. In the 1920s, the region was home to the most elaborate rail system in the country: almost 1,500 miles of track connecting the eastern desert with the Pacific Coast. It was Los Angeles's great transit network, not the automobile, that jump-started the region's sprawl, said Martin Wachs, a transportation expert at the Rand Corp. But by the 1960s, the car had taken over, and all the trains were gone.

The MTA now finds itself rebuilding the old system -- in some places along the same rights-of-way.

"Sometimes retro is the wave of the future," mused Bart Reed, executive director of the Transit Coalition, a Southern California-based nonprofit organization. "L.A. can't really sprawl anymore. So we are retrofitting our city. There really is nowhere else to go."

L.A., Long Ruled by Cars, Becoming a Transit Leader
Evolving Region Pushes for More Rail LinesBy John Pomfret
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, December 17, 2006; Page A03

In 1985, a building blew up on Wilshire Boulevard after subway tunneling hit a methane pocket. [/B]

That was incorrect. In 1985 they didn't even start building the subway, which started in 1986, and even that construction was limited to just Downtown.
There was an explosion at a Ross clothing store on 3rd Street across from Farmer's Market, several blocks north of Wilshire. The whole building did not blow up, but the culprit was methane pockets. News of that caused the RTD to re-route the subway along Vermont instead of Fairfax and put the Wilshire alignment on hold. I'm glad though they did build the short branch line to Wilshire/Western though because without it, building the Purple Line to the Westside would have been an impossibility by now.

And as a person who lives three blocks from one of the Vermont stations...Thank goodness for methane gas! :D

Really interesting that a Vermont alignment wasn't the first choice, it just seems to make so much sense now.

Really interesting that a Vermont alignment wasn't the first choice, it just seems to make so much sense now.

Of course! How can Vermont Ave, the city's most busiest bus corridor be ignored, and how can the city's most famous street (Hollywood Blvd) just have one mere station? Not to mention not having a station at the most famous intersection in the world (Hollywood & Vine)?

This was the original map, circa early 1980s. (The RTD was the bus operator for LA county from 1964 to 1993 when it merged with the LA County Transportation Commission to become today's MTA):

http://www.transit-insider.org/redline/her-ex_redline_map.jpg

All of the stations listed above have or will become reality, except for the Beverly/Fairfax, Santa Monica/Fairfax and Sunset/Highland stations.

^^ Hey check it out it's RTD...... beep beep!

^^ Hey check it out it's RTD...... beep beep!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/85/Detail_library_scrtd_f08.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/04/Rtd-color_logo.gif

Rough, Tough & Dirty...

Real Tardy Drivers...

A familiar L.A. sight in the '70s...

http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Lane/1488/7103_51.jpg

Now you know where the MTA's Metro Local orange color came from...

Those are some scary looking buses...... I do like the chrome bumper.

Those are some scary looking buses...... I do like the chrome bumper.

Almost every city had those from early 70s-early 80s. They called them "Fishbowl" buses.

That pic says 1971 but I see a subway car over to the left and an I assume 1980's looking bus over to the right.

That pic says 1971 but I see a subway car over to the left and an I assume 1980's looking bus over to the right.

The RTD was ahead of its time :) j/k

Haha I knew someone would catch that. The bus is circa 1971 but it appears the pic was taken in the early '90s; the subway car is a mock-up of half of a Red Line car that the RTD/MTA displayed at public events. Also, the license plates are the white 1990s era California plates, not the blue and gold from the '70s. That was the first clue that led me to believe this was a pic of a restored "heritage" bus the MTA keeps in its shops. Apparently they have one of every old bus they used to have, even the old 1950s era buses for posterity's sake.

That pic says 1971 but I see a subway car over to the left and an I assume 1980's looking bus over to the right.



^ Good eye (K)*