Quote:
Originally Posted by caligrad
You beat me to it, especially with this line :
"Even going from Jamaica queens to downtown Manhattan on the completely grade separated NYC subway will still take over an hour"
You read my mind. Every time I hear people whine about a commute "taking 45 mins to an hour being to long" I laugh, because I attribute that to a lack of knowledge on how other "transit oriented cities" work.
I lived in NYC for YEARS. My commutes routinely took me 45 mins to an hour and that's normal. Its all about distance. Saying "well Norwalk to Santa Monica will take an hour and 30 mins, that's too long".... ummm seeing how that would take 2 transfers from the green ( to the blue and then expo), that's actually pretty quick but that's not a trip that normal people will take on a day to day basis anyway.
|
Actually, this is where you (as usual) display a total lack of depth in urban issues. You, Caligrad, basically represent the ignorant sun-belter identity of LA that we are trying so hard to pry ourselves from.
LA isn't a uni-centric metro like NY. Your comment that Norwalk to SM or Culver isn't what normal people do day to day is ludicrous. LA is DEFINED by people who make these sorts of commutes. In my office of 30, I work with six people who commute at least this distance, two of which who commute from Long Beach to SM by car. Luckily their shifts start at 7am so their commute takes a totally reasonable 30-40 minutes. Expo, on the other hand, would take them 1hour 40 minutes, not including getting to/from the station (realistically 2 hours door to door) and they live a 5 minutes drive from their Willowbrook station. This demonstrates a failing of our "network" to provide viable alternatives for REGULAR people (non-captives, eg. people worth a damn to the economy)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by caligrad
People need to get off this notion that "Transit oriented cities rail is just quicker" because to be 100% honest, its the same. like I said, its all about distance. People commute to NYC regularly every morning and some of their commutes (including transfers and walking) will in fact take about an hour and 30 minutes, if not longer and that's just one way.
|
See above. Including walking being operative. LA is not unicentric. The commute from one random corner of LA to another random corner is more typical. Door to door times are REALISTICALLY in the order of 2 hours for many otherwise freeway commuters. IN THE REAL WORLD, Door to door is what matters.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Caligrad
And I'm so over the bike lane conversation. Not everyone will be riding bikes. point. blank. period. I'm in my late 20s and pretty strong bodied, you're not going to catch me taking a bike and riding 20 blocks to my destination just so that I get their tired, sweaty and irritated with the idiots around me. People have no problem riding their bikes in the street and on sidewalks when the bike lanes end, as is the case in Long Beach, so why aren't we seeing bikes being used 10 fold? People commuting to work on bikes in LA county doesn't even touch 1%. And adding bike lanes wont change that number drastically. but adding more "horrible of a joke" rail will do more than bike lanes.
|
You just gave yourself away. Unlike NY, LA is spread out to begin with. Following that fact, LA's "transit network" is already doomed to be just as spread out at complete build-out. How do you think people will get to and from their closest stations? Build enormous parking structures at each stop?
The basic fact that you've failed to consider this basic and fatal shortcoming of this uniquely Angeleno of problems (owing to our sprawly land use and commute patterns) proves your general ignorance of this topic and disqualifies your opinion. You're basically a sunbelter from Houston (which you've made apparent) who's living in LA. You're the urbanists equivalent of a red-stater. I've always stated that your cohort is the problem with Los Angeles. They are the NIMBYs who don't "get it". I Makes total sense now.
Prev
Linear Mode
