HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #121  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 6:18 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 25,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
I didn't mention ridership. I mentioned the number of routes, which I'm guessing only NYC has more of. Bus routes are infrastucture and the ridership sure as hell beats Dallas or Houston train ridershuip, in 1990 or now.
Houston's train is nasty. LA's is much more robust and not nearly as skeevy. You really can't compare them. If Houston's LRT wasn't so much a bum conveyance, ridership might be higher. Can't speak for DART, only rode a couple of times. But much better than Houston but still bummy.
     
     
  #122  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 6:25 PM
edale edale is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 523
^ Lol dude, I haven't been to Houston to ride their train, but the rail in LA is also verrrrry bummy and skeevy. I've seen some pretty crazy shit on the Red Line here, and smelled smells I wouldn't wish on my worst enemies.
     
     
  #123  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 6:37 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
Crawford pointed out why.
Once it gets more expensive, it's going to lose a ton of growth.

The same people getting priced out of the north east and California will get priced out of Texas, Florida and Georgia.
It's just a matter of time.
This is pretty apt on a macro measure.

The easiest places to develop, develop first, they are now the classic old metros we know today, Modern development (basically world war two on) has gone to the less cheap and desirable developments to secondary ones. (Sunbelt Boom Growth)

As the Sunbelt matures (they still have long growth legs many more decades of it) More people will move deeper into "flyover" country for the same reasons they moved to the sunbelt.

Cheaper retirement, Cheaper living, ability to afford housing, new opportunities in new developing cities etc. Places like Idaho, the Dakotas and Montana, Nebraska and Wyoming.

Dont be surprised to see places like Billings, Fargo, and Omaha end up having boom town type growth in the latter part of this century.

For those of you that are still around

Of course all of this is assuming things generally go in the same direction they have gone in the last 100-125 years and we dont have like a global pandemic, or discover some new resource that can replace oil and is located primarily in Alabama and West Virginia etc.
     
     
  #124  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 6:42 PM
homebucket homebucket is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 888
For heavy rail, LA's Red/Purple lines actually have pretty good ridership per mile, higher than DC, Chicago, and SF BART.

For light rail, Houston's METRO Rail has slightly higher ridership per mile than LA's Blue/Green/Gold/Expo lines. Dallas' DART is way down on the list.

In terms of commuter rail, Dallas' Trinity Railway Express has higher ridership/mile than LA's Metrolink.

Source: https://www.citylab.com/transportati...ervice/576739/
     
     
  #125  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 6:51 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 25,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by edale View Post
^ Lol dude, I haven't been to Houston to ride their train, but the rail in LA is also verrrrry bummy and skeevy. I've seen some pretty crazy shit on the Red Line here, and smelled smells I wouldn't wish on my worst enemies.
Lol. It must have been an off day when I rode it. Wasn't too sketchy..
     
     
  #126  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 6:54 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket View Post
For heavy rail, LA's Red/Purple lines actually have pretty good ridership per mile, higher than DC, Chicago, and SF BART.
That's not a reasonable comparison, though. LA basically has one subway line. The other three cities have extensive heavy rail systems (and DC is more like a heavy rail-commuter rail hybrid, and BART is really commuter rail).

If you compared LA's red line to the busiest heavy rail routes in these three cities, LA would likely have the lowest ridership (and you could probably throw in Boston and Philly).
     
     
  #127  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 6:57 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by edale View Post
^ Lol dude, I haven't been to Houston to ride their train, but the rail in LA is also verrrrry bummy and skeevy. I've seen some pretty crazy shit on the Red Line here, and smelled smells I wouldn't wish on my worst enemies.
Same is true for Chicago though. It just has more commuters to balance it out.
But I saw some shit.
     
     
  #128  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 6:58 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket View Post
For heavy rail, LA's Red/Purple lines actually have pretty good ridership per mile, higher than DC, Chicago, and SF BART.

For light rail, Houston's METRO Rail has slightly higher ridership per mile than LA's Blue/Green/Gold/Expo lines. Dallas' DART is way down on the list.

In terms of commuter rail, Dallas' Trinity Railway Express has higher ridership/mile than LA's Metrolink.

Source: https://www.citylab.com/transportati...ervice/576739/
Again, not talking about ridership. I'm talking about the infrastructure, that's in place. One city has far more than the other two in this conversation.
     
     
  #129  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 7:00 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
Lol. It must have been an off day when I rode it. Wasn't too sketchy..
The redline isn't as bad as people think lol. No worse than Chicago's red line. CTA tattler blog is full of horror stories in anything you can think of.
I'm sure NYC has something similar, since it draws it's fair of share of weirdos.
     
     
  #130  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 7:04 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
This is pretty apt on a macro measure.

The easiest places to develop, develop first, they are now the classic old metros we know today, Modern development (basically world war two on) has gone to the less cheap and desirable developments to secondary ones. (Sunbelt Boom Growth)

As the Sunbelt matures (they still have long growth legs many more decades of it) More people will move deeper into "flyover" country for the same reasons they moved to the sunbelt.

Cheaper retirement, Cheaper living, ability to afford housing, new opportunities in new developing cities etc. Places like Idaho, the Dakotas and Montana, Nebraska and Wyoming.

Dont be surprised to see places like Billings, Fargo, and Omaha end up having boom town type growth in the latter part of this century.

For those of you that are still around

Of course all of this is assuming things generally go in the same direction they have gone in the last 100-125 years and we dont have like a global pandemic, or discover some new resource that can replace oil and is located primarily in Alabama and West Virginia etc.
Yea, I don't see what this is hard to understand. Texans (as usual) want to believe their situation is different, because, well, it's Texas. There are cheaper cities outside of Texas that will draw the same people getting priced out. There's evidence for this, and not some wishful thinking bs. "Oh...but we have space" crap that means nothing.

What's stopping OKC from absorbing Texans outflow? Or Tulsa? Or KC?
     
     
  #131  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 7:11 PM
Chisouthside Chisouthside is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Silicon Valley/Chicago
Posts: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
The redline isn't as bad as people think lol. No worse than Chicago's red line. CTA tattler blog is full of horror stories in anything you can think of.
I'm sure NYC has something similar, since it draws it's fair of share of weirdos.
The LA Red Line is super chill compared to the Chicago Red Line. BART too imo was way chiller than anything on the CTA.
     
     
  #132  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 7:17 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chisouthside View Post
The LA Red Line is super chill compared to the Chicago Red Line. BART too imo was way chiller than anything on the CTA.
Yea, the people who get freaked out of LA's red line are people who haven't traveled on NYC/Chicago trains much or just aren't used to big city public transportation. I've done both, hundreds of times. While they're some homeless or weirdos here and there, it's 90% of commuters, students, tourists like anwhere else.

But I was on edge more on Chicago's red line, sad to say. Brown line was my favorite, Orange 2nd, and Blue line 3rd. Blue line could get sketchy too though. Brown and Orange were great though.
     
     
  #133  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 7:31 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 25,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
The redline isn't as bad as people think lol. No worse than Chicago's red line. CTA tattler blog is full of horror stories in anything you can think of.
I'm sure NYC has something similar, since it draws it's fair of share of weirdos.
Never been freaked out in Chicago or New York which is probably why LA didn't phase me. SEPTA in Philly is a bit shifty though...
     
     
  #134  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 7:36 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,747
Yea, that too. Defintely in the mix from what I remember. Same with Baltimore.

DC's Metro is the only one where I didn't see any issues. On the flip side to that, it made it kind of bland.
     
     
  #135  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 7:48 PM
sopas ej's Avatar
sopas ej sopas ej is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Pasadena, California
Posts: 4,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
Yea, the people who get freaked out of LA's red line are people who haven't traveled on NYC/Chicago trains much or just aren't used to big city public transportation.
Yeah, I really don't think LA's Red Line is that bad. I've experienced worse on the Blue Line. Even the Green Line is kinda bad; on the Green Line, I've seen a guy full on pee on the platform, near the stairs... hehe but from what I saw, he could have starred in "Horse Hung Hispanics III." It's like "Dayum, son!"
__________________
"If the climate were a bank, the U.S. would have already saved it."

---Hugo Chávez
     
     
  #136  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 8:00 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd3189 View Post
I think it’s fair to say that there is a low likelihood now that LA could ever be the most populous metro in the country in the future. However, the original OP only considered the implications that could have occurred if LA did reach expected projections in the 80s and became the largest in the early 2000s. I am wanting to hear some visionary stuff with this topic, a sort of alternative timeline or history.
I think that even if LA's CSA did catch up to NY's, it would just invite critiques of how CSA's are sometimes generously defined. The gap between NY and LA has actually been growing for quite some time -- NY's MSA has added more people since 1990 than LA's. Most of LA's CSA growth has been in areas that are fairly disconnected from Los Angeles city.
     
     
  #137  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 8:21 PM
edale edale is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 523
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
Yea, the people who get freaked out of LA's red line are people who haven't traveled on NYC/Chicago trains much or just aren't used to big city public transportation. I've done both, hundreds of times. While they're some homeless or weirdos here and there, it's 90% of commuters, students, tourists like anwhere else.

But I was on edge more on Chicago's red line, sad to say. Brown line was my favorite, Orange 2nd, and Blue line 3rd. Blue line could get sketchy too though. Brown and Orange were great though.
I saw a trans woman punch an elderly man in the face, breaking his glasses, and then pull out a pair of scissors and chase after the guy who tried to intervene on the red line. That was at like 5:30 in the middle of the rush hour commute. Obviously this is extreme behavior, and most of the time it's pretty chill. But I've seen fights on the platforms, guys rolling blunts on the train (and dumping the tobacco on the floor), my friend got her phone stolen right out of her hand...

Most days it's a pretty unremarkable experience, and I've not experienced anything that would make me consider stopping taking transit. I am hesitant to use the Red Line outside of rush hour, though. Besides the 20+ min headways, the subway can be pretty empty after rush hour and you can find yourself in an unpleasant situation without many other people around.
     
     
  #138  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 8:29 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
Yea, I don't see what this is hard to understand. Texans (as usual) want to believe their situation is different, because, well, it's Texas. There are cheaper cities outside of Texas that will draw the same people getting priced out. There's evidence for this, and not some wishful thinking bs. "Oh...but we have space" crap that means nothing.

What's stopping OKC from absorbing Texans outflow? Or Tulsa? Or KC?
All the space buys is time. People forget how new the USA really is, most of North America was virtual wilderness until the last 150 years or so, much of it still is.

Most other places on earth have had eons to develop and change with the ebb and flow of population, There are still plenty of small cities and towns all across America that still hold the potential to become massive cities in a century.
     
     
  #139  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 8:45 PM
LA21st LA21st is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by edale View Post
I saw a trans woman punch an elderly man in the face, breaking his glasses, and then pull out a pair of scissors and chase after the guy who tried to intervene on the red line. That was at like 5:30 in the middle of the rush hour commute. Obviously this is extreme behavior, and most of the time it's pretty chill. But I've seen fights on the platforms, guys rolling blunts on the train (and dumping the tobacco on the floor), my friend got her phone stolen right out of her hand...

Most days it's a pretty unremarkable experience, and I've not experienced anything that would make me consider stopping taking transit. I am hesitant to use the Red Line outside of rush hour, though. Besides the 20+ min headways, the subway can be pretty empty after rush hour and you can find yourself in an unpleasant situation without many other people around.
I use it all the time to Hollywood (mostly for Runyon/Arclight) or dowtown on the weekends. It's fine. Alot of tourists, actually.

The worst time is early morning on weekends (like 6-7 am) when the homeless havent' been "kicked off" yet. The smells are not pleaseant.

I won't get into my expercienes on Chicago's CTA lol. Its too gross.
     
     
  #140  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2019, 8:51 PM
homebucket homebucket is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA21st View Post
Again, not talking about ridership. I'm talking about the infrastructure, that's in place. One city has far more than the other two in this conversation.
The point is that if LA were to become the largest city through increased density, public transit share needs to improve. Percentage of population using public transit is currently only at 11% (and dropping). If catching up to NYC means adding another 4 million or whatever people, and thus 3.56 million people on the roads assuming 11% public transit usage, that would overwhelm the already congested freeway system. For sustainable population growth, LA needs to encourage its residents to consider public transit as a viable commuting option.


https://smartasset.com/mortgage/best...transportation
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:50 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.