Traffic
Yep, we are jumping into the fray after reading multiple stories of late. While traffic may be lite this holiday week, It will all be back next week. Besides, we can't tell you to go play on the freeways and not send them a little love and respect every once and a while. Here we go...First up, Gridlock City featured this weekend in the Los Angeles Times Magazine. My favorite passage:
It's true: We're stuck. And, like Tarczynski, more and more of us are opting to stay within the borders of our neighborhoods for catching a movie or eating a great steak, browsing in a bookstore, shopping for organic vegetables. Trek across town for a concert or to go to a museum? Who needs the hassle? Who has the time?Next up, LAist Rants: Why Not Here, Why Not Now? Here's a snip:
There is nothing like watching a neighborhood long thought down for the count begin to thrive. And that, it appears, will be the region's next wave. If there is an upside to gridlock, it's that L.A. might become less car-centered and more community-based.
It is simple, two more rail routes need to be built. One line that runs along the 405 from the Santa Clarita Valley to the OC. Then, another line that runs along the 10 from the beach to San Bernardino. Bam. That's it. Traffic problem solved. So if we want to alleviate traffic (everybody loves that) while helping to clean the air (sounds good to me), lets improve the public transportation system. C'mon, this is Los Angeles - lots of people are trying to get to lots of differerent places. If I want to get to where I need to go without the headache and stress, what would be better than taking a train ride?Last up is this, Experts: Turn Metrolink into regional rail network. More snips:
The money needed to enhance the service would need to come from the county's MTA, where Lancaster Mayor Frank Roberts and county Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich sit on the board of directors, Reed said. Antonovich's 5th District includes the north county.Granted we are simplifying the process, but I think these people might be on to something...
"The good thing we're talking about with Metrolink is the track is there, the stations are there and the cars and locomotives are sitting idle for great parts of the day, so a lot of the elements are already there," said Dyson, a rail expert and consultant.
Posted by Anonymous @ 11/21/2005 07:40:00 AM
17 Comments:
I've got something for you to chew on: get a freakin' bike!
When you ride it, put some bright, blinking, lights on it, and take up the WHOLE right lane. Don't ride on the sidewalk, or the curb gutter. If cars honk, you give them the finger. You can cruise at about 25 mph riding like this.
Of course, you have to live and work in a smaller radius to really make this work - but there is a lot you're missing by driving around all the time.
You're awfully logical for a cute guy.
ubrayj02
What about a skateboard or rollerblades?
As to Gridlock City, absolutely right.
Except on rare occasions, we are staying close to home. It is just too much of a hassle.
Pronto's, Sorrento's, Ante's, The Whale and Ale, The Boardwalk Cafe, Ports O'Call, that's about it. What more do you need anyway?
As to films, it's the Warner Grand, Terrace 6, and an occasional trip to the theater in the PV mall. Torrance? Forget it.
We are even walking for short trips where we would have driven last year.
We went to visit my mother last night in Culver City. 45 minutes at 6:30 PM on Sunday, with the 405 in total gridlock north of the 105. We finally got off at La Cienega and fought our way across the city streets. What a nightmare.
Careful on the bike ubrayjo2. Our younger son is and avid bike rider, and has damn near gotten himself killed 3 times. It's really dangerous in the city traffic. We need you to keep blogging. Don't get run over.
I think until we quit "sprawl building" with no public transportation, we won't be able to incorporate bikes, skateboards, walkers or roller bladers.
We have money to blow here in Los Angeles and it ain't going to be on something that we need, like more subways. We need to build convention centers that nobody uses and hotels that will never be filled. We need to clean up the filthy streets.
There is trash on every single street in Los Angeles. There is trash on all of the exit ramps.
They want to put billboards on the freeways so bad they can't stand it, when the reason that tourists come here is because it's pretty.
They want to take away lap dancing because I don't think they've caught on to how much money tourists spend on that. We have to listen to all of their religious values.
They do everything they can to make tourists never want to come here again and then they build them new hotels.
We've elected geniuses.
Metrolink is not suited to being a regional rail network for a few big reasons:
1. While some railroad tracks aren't terribly busy (such as those used by the Orange County and Ventura County lines), all of the east-west lines between the ports, the downtown/Commerce rail yards, and the Inland Empire are packed with freight trains. There is absolutely no way to get more-frequent service on these lines without building more infrastructure. BNSF and UP are pissed enough as it is at having to let Metrolink use their trackage, considering how scarce it is. Commuter rail lines in the Northeast and in Chicago can operate easily because there's so much abandoned freight rail right-of-way in those places, but there is very little standard-gauge (as opposed to Pacific Electric narrow-gauge) rail laid in Southern California that is not currently in use for freight.
2. While some Metrolink stops are well-located--Fullerton, Anaheim, San Juan Capistrano, and Pomona come to mind--just as many are in places with poor connecting transit and not much within walking distance. (Best examples: Glendale and Chatsworth.) There really were never straight-up commuter rail suburbs in greater Los Angeles akin to Chicago's North Shore or Philadelphia's Main Line; most were built along streetcar lines.
3. Commuter rail is expensive. It is by far the most heavily subsidized mode of transit on a per-rider basis--much more so than light rail and subways, and several dozen times as much as buses. Moreover, it doesn't pass the smell test on equity issues (=lawsuits), because commuter rail riders are actually disproportionately wealthy when compared to drivers, let alone transit users as a whole. In most cities, the typical commuter rail user is a middle manager or professional who works in a downtown office tower and lives in a far-out suburb. Compare this with the low average income of Metro Rail riders, many (if not most) of whom are poor or working-class blacks and Latinos going from Watts or Koreatown to jobs on Bunker Hill--and let's not even get into the income profile of the typical bus rider. You can ask Genevieve Giuliano (USC) or Brian Taylor (UCLA) about these things sometime; Giuliano is my PhD advisor.
---
Look, I can understand why folks in suburbia want more Metrolink service; everybody wants everyone else to get out of their cars so they can drive with no traffic. However, I'm not at all convinced that money should be spent on lightly-used suburban transit systems when a truly useful Wilshire Boulevard subway would have half a million riders the day it opens.
Oh, let me point out something about my last comment, re equity issues:
The BRU lawsuit--arguing that MTA was shortchanging poor people to help rich train riders--was absolute nonsense. I mean, just look at all those upper-class neighborhoods traversed by the Blue Line.
That said, putting money into Metrolink instead of developing inner-city transit would be robbing the poor to help out the rich.
And Bisno wants to add to the gridlock misery in San Pedro and RPV so he can make an obscene profit.
Maintain R-1 even if the stumbling LAUSD dinosaur lands on Ponte Vista!
We should sink all of the extra money we can possibly find in to extending the subway as far west, south and north as we can.
Subways are fast, convenient, safe and they aren't ugly. Nobody knows they're there. As long as there are stops often enough to make it convenient, it will work.
And I refuse to listen to that "they're dangerous because we live in Earthquake country." Bull shit. Look at Kobe, Japan. Now tell me who has the most earthquakes and how often Kobe has had a catastrophe.
Right. Never.
It's another political promise of bullshit.
By the way, there's considerable theoretical and empirical evidence that it is almost impossible to build enough transportation capacity--whether roads or rail--to completely eliminate peak-hour congestion. See Anthony Downs, Still Stuck in Traffic (2005).
New York has the most extensive transit system of any city in North America, and quite possibly in the Western Hemisphere, and yet it has horrifying traffic. People don't notice it as much as they do here, because there are subways there and there aren't any realistic alternatives to driving for all but the shortest hauls around here. Nevertheless, automobile traffic isn't exactly flying up and down Fifth Avenue, and it's a pain in the ass to find parking even in the outer boroughs.
It's called sarcasm, Archie (re: Blue Line).
Also, if they had trains moving mid-day on Metrolink, they would have to pay absolutely monstrous rents to UP and BNSF for their trackage. Running commuter rail on right-of-way that you don't own is not a fixed-cost business.
One more thing: A Wilshire subway helps 250,000+ desperately poor people in Koreatown and Westlake get to jobs on the West Side, even if they're just as janitors and prep cooks. But, oh wait--you moved to the suburbs so you don't have to think about those people.
Archie said: But I forget I live in the Suburbs and stuck in a shitty cookie-cutter house and ride the Commuter train to my blue-collar job.
Now we know why you are so racist, sarcastic and miserable. You are unhappy in your lifestyle.
Poor old grouchy guy.
Well, it may get a little personal at times (I've been told to EAT DIESEL AND DIE on this blog more times that I care to count), but what a great public policy discussion.
These thoughtful comments are clearly made by people who have read about, studied, and thought about the issues very carefully.
I read through these yesterday, and I thought that this is really the value of the blogosphere. None of this stuff would ever get space in the traditional media. Who knows, unless they have it blocked out in City hall, someone on the Mayor's staff (Council, State Legislature, Congress????) might actually see these thoughtful comments.
This may not be a very original thought - I a novice at this stuff - but take it as a compliment to all of you bloggers. Great work. Keep it up. Thanks Mayors Sam and Frank as well.
No problem. I've been laughing at it all along.
Hey Archie:
Sorry to be so slow on the uptake, but your comment at 9:08 reminds me of the late Peter Tosh, who always used to refer to the Babylon Shitstem.
A great man until they shot him.
Forget about the subway, forget about any other publicly funded modes of transportation.
Just erase the possibilty from your mind, and then ask yourself: do I want to drive a car for the rest of my life, stuck in traffic?
If you don't - then get a bike and ride it like you would drive a car. Blinking lights, middle of the lane, no fear. You will be surprised how *safe* it actually is. Once you make up your mind and do it, you, as a bicyclist, are in control of the situation.
Bike lanes are ghettos for people who haven't been shown how to really ride.
With zero public money, a little knowledge,and a small personal investment, you've solved 90% of your transportation worries.
Eff the gubmint. Do it yourself.
If you have a bike that needs fixing, roll by the East Los Angeles Bike Oven (on Wednesday nights) or go to the Bicycle Kitchen for free, or nearly free, advice, repairs, and bike knowledge.
Arch:
Or the diesel.
ubrayj02:
Wear your helmet buddy. I'm serious.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home