Orange Thread for The Weekend
Our open thread for this weekend is dedicated to the Metro Orange Line Busway in the San Fernando Valley. Its been operational for a little over three months, and the MTA is claiming success. Though this old, dead, Republican mayor was dubious of the project to begin with, it seems to be turning a corner in achieving its ridership goals, and oh, not running into as many cars as it had in the early days. In fact, if MTA's figures are accurate, the Orange Line's accident rate per 100,000 miles traveled is actually lower than other lines on the system. Still, in my view, a light rail system with a direct connection to the Metro Red Line would have been far more effective. In another development, the Transit Coalition, which has been similarly dubious of the Orange Line, is now advancing a proposal to extend the line from North Hollywood to Bob Hope Airport in Burbank.Here is a list of Orange Line related items you may find intereting:
- Google search of past Orange Line related articles on Mayor Sam's Sister City
- Recent Daily News article on efforts by the MTA to reduce Orange Line related noise
- The Transit Coalition's Orange Line page (lots of interesting items)
- Orange Line article on Wikipedia
- For contrast, an interesting article on Wikipedia on Singapore's mass transit program, light years ahead of LA's
Posted by Mayor Sam @ 2/11/2006 11:31:00 AM
20 Comments:
I looked up the MTA's numbers for the Orange Line. We would have been better off buying every Orange Line commuter a Honda Civic Sedan. Let's do the math:
Total cost of construction: $337.6 million.
Number of people who ride it: 7750 (assuming the "daily ridership" of 15,500 comprises 7750 people each making a round trip).
That means we spent $43,561 PER RIDER just to build this bad boy. That's BEFORE you pay for salaries, gas, maintenance, or personal injury defense lawyers. (And even if TWICE as many people ride it, the cost works out to $21,781 PER RIDER.)
We could have bought EACH passenger his or her own brand new Honda Civic Sedan for $14,560, and pocketed the difference. It wouldn't have reduced traffic jams appreciably, but: i) neither did construction of the Orange Line; and ii) ask everyone on the bus which he would rather have, and I'm guessing 99% respond "new car," while the remaining 1% respond, "What is the frequency, Kenneth?"
My point -- to the extent I have one -- is that we need to look at the COSTS of these projects, to see if they're justified by the benefits.
The frequency is 94.4 MHz, and, my names' not "Kenneth" -- it's James Kenneth!
Unless that's not the kind of "frequency" you were asking about, in which case it's once or twice a week, unless she's pissed at me about something (but that's none of your damn business, really).
Walter,
You will never be mayor. You won't even be a councilman. You are without a doubt, one of the whackiest and least bright men I've seen post on here.
Your figures are insanely laughable.
Clean money won't help you bud. All the smart candidates will come out.
Omigod! A post that is almost admitting that Mayor AV did something right?
Unbelievable. Where are the CD14 Losers Blogging Team to tell us irrelevant things about his family, his past, his lying and cheating?
Gag me with a spoon!
(Well, it IS The Valley, you know)
To "Anonymous at 3:50 a.m." --
I'm "whacky," yet you're name-calling on-line deep in a Saturday night? Remember: drinking and typing don't mix.
P.S. The figures come directly from MTA press releases and the Honda website. So they may be laughable, but they are the "official" figures. If you have a source indicated they're wrong, by all means cite it so we can all ask the MTA why it's using the wrong ones.
Correction: "indicating," not "indicated."
And I even found this hidden link:
http://thetransitcoalition.us/TTC_FOOL.htm
The Orange Line is the first step. The north/south connectors will eventually come (in 10 years?) I would say it is a positive addition to the region's Public Transit System (versus doing nothing).
Also, remember that the Orange Line right-of-way was built to light rail standards. This is especially important in regards to the bridge that crosses the L.A. River in the Sepulveda Basin. It could be converted to trains in the future if the ridership demanded it.
What's happened to this blog? Are you losing your touch Mayor Sam? You let the Times scoop you on the Ludlow / SEIU / MTA scandal, then you completely ignore Mayor AV humiliating himself on nationwide tv and you with absolutley no comment. Did they buy you off?
alas, there's always LA Observed.
Just got an email that the Hotel and Restaurant Wokers Union endorsed Monica Garcia and threw in a double chesse burgerm malt and fries.
Mayor Sam - there are plenty of things more efficient. The real question is whether one can pay for it.
Walter - the amount of money spent cannot be divided by the ridership from Day 1 to today. The cost divided over the long haul is the real measure, not to mention the improvement to the environment and reduction in traffic by having thousands fewer vehicles on the road.
This is a prime example of the warped reasoning that should keep you out of any real decision-making position.
Walter, I was not out drinking on Saturday night. I go jogging from 4-6AM on Saturday and Sundays with a group of people.
On Saturday night I was in bed at 9PM.
Sorry, try again.
You say:
"The cost divided over the long haul is the real measure, not to mention the improvement to the environment and reduction in traffic by having thousands fewer vehicles on the road."
Fine. What are those figures? I'm guessing you don't have any re: i) how many passengers were already riding busses; ii) emissions from cars displaced by the bus vs. emissions from the busses.
And what do you think the "cost divided over the long haul" is? How do you define that and measure it? I'm guessing you don't, and you instead simply "support" mass transit without regard to costs and benefits.
As for getting up early to run, that's nice, but your response is still devoid of any facts, figures or analysis. Merely saying "nu-uh" really doesn't add to the discussion. How about a reasoned discussion based on facts for a change, as opposed to mere insults and ad hominem attacks?
and oh, not running into as many cars as it had in the early days.
The cars hit the buses. The buses did not hit the cars. Idiots that apparently do not read blogs, newspapers, news sites or watch television news, were unaware of the what the Orange Line is and despite having seen it under construction never stopped to ask what it is.
I rode the Orange Line this weekend to see what it was like and at moments it was packed. In the evening, on my way back from Warner Center the buses returning to the Valley were full as were the Red Line subway cars from North Hollywood to Union Stattion.
One of the long term benefits of transit will be the modification of development patterns that create automobile dependency. The change will not happen overnight, but we can't sit around doing nothing in the mean time.
The mindset of people like Walter Moore's is remnant of the past. It's a mindset for people who think that there are still orange groves lining the valley floor.
Omigod! A post that is almost admitting that Mayor AV did something right?
Villaraigosa did not initiate the development of the Orange Line nor was he mayor when construction began.
How is this post an admission that he did something right?
But i will give him credit for any funding he helped to secure as an Assemblyman.
The jerk who installed those "bike racks" (or whatever they are supposedto be) on the Orange Line should be publicly flogged. Those are a liability law-suit waiting to happen.
Have you ever tried hoisting a bicycle on a moving bus, while holding a lever open with your left foot, and swinging a metal hook with your right hand? I have, and it sucks, and you hit people with your bike, and it takes forever to get the thing down again when you want ot get off the bus.
The Orange Line is very cool, and modern, and surprisingly convenient to many important destinations in the valley - but the bike racks have got to go.
Yeah, looking at costs and benefits, and quantifying same, is indeed a remnant of the past. The modern approach is to base policy on platitudes. It's much simpler, and helps justify any "feel good" expenditure, regardless whether it actually works. If it doesn't, hey, it must mean we need to raise taxes and spend more.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home