SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   City Discussions (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Are LA's rail transit expansion plans enough to shift the city away from the car? (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=249564)

kittyhawk28 Jan 6, 2022 5:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 9495036)
I don't think high(er) density is necessarily the issue. It's that LA land use/lifestyle/cultural patterns don't really fit with high capacity transit corridors, at least for the non-poor.

For example, there's that vaguely South Florida/Latin American-feeling high density apartment canyon between Westwood and Bev Hills. Not sure if that microneighborhood has a name:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0620...7i16384!8i8192

In theory, it would be perfect for high capacity transit. Tall, dense towers along LA's premiere linear corridor, with heavy existing bus service and rail eventually. But that area has very low transit ridership, isn't pedestrian friendly and is unlikely to ever morph into a traditional urban corridor.

That's exactly why they're building the Purple Line extension, to serve the linear high-density corridor along Wilshire.

destroycreate Jan 6, 2022 5:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 9495036)
I don't think high(er) density is necessarily the issue. It's that LA land use/lifestyle/cultural patterns don't really fit with high capacity transit corridors, at least for the non-poor.

For example, there's that vaguely South Florida/Latin American-feeling high density apartment canyon between Westwood and Bev Hills. Not sure if that microneighborhood has a name:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0620...7i16384!8i8192

In theory, it would be perfect for high capacity transit. Tall, dense towers along LA's premiere linear corridor, with heavy existing bus service and rail eventually. But that area has very low transit ridership, isn't pedestrian friendly and is unlikely to ever morph into a traditional urban corridor.

That stretch is called the Wilshire Corridor. I actually love that area, but it lacks any walkable amenities whatsoever unfortunately so isn't really a "neighborhood".

Crawford Jan 6, 2022 5:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kittyhawk28 (Post 9495050)
That's exactly why they're building the Purple Line extension, to serve the linear high-density corridor along Wilshire.

Right, and that's my point.

It isn't transit oriented, already, despite having ideal density and transit access. Those condo dwellers aren't likely to start taking transit.

sopas ej Jan 6, 2022 6:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 9495088)
Right, and that's my point.

It isn't transit oriented, already, despite having ideal density and transit access. Those condo dwellers aren't likely to start taking transit.

And the Purple Line extension isn't being built just solely for them. More others will ride it.

And, that's just one particular stretch of Wilshire. And guess what, there won't be any stops along that Wilshire Condo Corridor anyway.

Going west, there'll be a Wilshire/Rodeo station in Beverly Hills, and then the next stop is in Century City, and then the next stop will be Wilshire/Westwood---completely bypassing that high-rise condo stretch.

mrnyc Jan 6, 2022 7:48 PM

some subway is good out there for sure, but more than any other city la is the one i wish for the most to bring the streetcars back.

i guess car drivers would never go for it anymore, but still i wish they would experiment with it somewhere to see what happens.

kittyhawk28 Jan 6, 2022 7:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc (Post 9495253)
some subway is good out there for sure, but more than any other city la is the one i wish for the most to bring the streetcars back.

i guess car drivers would never go for it anymore, but still i wish they would experiment with it somewhere to see what happens.

Most of the core Pacific Electric streetcar network is already back in some form, either in the form of existing/planned LRT lines (A Line, E Line, West Santa Ana Branch), or Metrolink Lines to the Inland Empire. What's really needed IMO, besides expanding new lines, is to really speed up or even upgrade the light rail lines to metro-level service quality (E Line in particular), as well as enhance Metrolink.

mrnyc Jan 6, 2022 8:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kittyhawk28 (Post 9495275)
Most of the core Pacific Electric streetcar network is already back in some form, either in the form of existing/planned LRT lines (A Line, E Line, West Santa Ana Branch), or Metrolink Lines to the Inland Empire. What's really needed IMO, besides expanding new lines, is to really speed up or even upgrade the light rail lines to metro-level service quality (E Line in particular), as well as enhance Metrolink.

yes but i wasn't thinking of inter-city, i meant along the city streets. :tup:

mhays Jan 6, 2022 8:20 PM

Streetcars would be too slow, and get stuck too easily. How about making the buses better -- more bus lanes, light priority, bulbed stops, rain/sun/wind shelters, etc.

homebucket Jan 6, 2022 8:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhays (Post 9494184)
To really address this question, we'll need to hear about buses. Rail plus the current bus system will have a limited effect.

LA has a lot of hurdles beyond infrastructure, but a better bus system would go a long way.

LA actually has a very robust bus system. It has the 3rd largest fleet in North America (17% of which are high capacity articulated buses), and 2nd highest ridership. It has 2 BRT lines, with dedicated lanes (busways), with 3 more in the pipeline. And they will have a fully electric bus system by 2030.

SAN Man Jan 6, 2022 9:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc (Post 9495278)
yes but i wasn't thinking of inter-city, i meant along the city streets. :tup:

Wouldn't a streetcar that is fixed on rails and running in traffic be a slower mode of transportation from the current bus system?

Busses have the flexibility to move around traffic backups and the city can build bus pull-outs to let traffic pass by as passengers load onto the bus.

SAN Man Jan 6, 2022 9:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by homebucket (Post 9495337)
LA actually has a very robust bus system. It has the 3rd largest fleet in North America (17% of which are high capacity articulated buses), and 2nd highest ridership. It has 2 BRT lines, with dedicated lanes (busways), with 3 more in the pipeline. And they will have a fully electric bus system by 2030.

The few electric busses that are on the road around here are cool. They're wrapped in a lime green color, nice and quiet.

mhays Jan 6, 2022 9:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by homebucket (Post 9495337)
LA actually has a very robust bus system. It has the 3rd largest fleet in North America (17% of which are high capacity articulated buses), and 2nd highest ridership. It has 2 BRT lines, with dedicated lanes (busways), with 3 more in the pipeline. And they will have a fully electric bus system by 2030.

Yet someone posted that buses often get stuck in traffic. And commute splits are pretty bad.

Maybe it can be a big system AND still deserve improvement.

homebucket Jan 6, 2022 9:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhays (Post 9495416)
Maybe it can be a big system AND still deserve improvement.

Sure, but you could say that about any bus system. Busses are always going to be slower per mile than trains. But they offer more flexibility in terms of routes and if something breaks down.

mhays Jan 6, 2022 10:01 PM

You're missing the point. Buses are getting stuck in traffic and they don't have to. LA could have a much better bus system if they added more dedicated lanes.

homebucket Jan 6, 2022 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhays (Post 9495445)
You're missing the point. Buses are getting stuck in traffic and they don't have to. LA could have a much better bus system if they added more dedicated lanes.

They already do:
https://goo.gl/maps/KMwwUwSfXvJr2QST7

And have been adding more:
https://thesource.metro.net/2021/12/...venue-in-dtla/

jmecklenborg Jan 6, 2022 10:21 PM

Dedicated lanes won't work because dedicated lanes are easiest and cheapest to establish where they are least-beneficial. They are most-needed at the busiest city intersections, but nobody's ever going to agree to wall off a 4-way intersection to give buses a fully-protected at-grade path (this is what third-world BRT systems do that the Tea Party loved so much). Building underpasses or overpasses at intersections just for buses moves at-grade stops well-away from corners and convenient transfer points. Building an underground station just for buses at a transfer point is theoretically possible but horrendously expensive - certainly more than $50 million per example.

Additionally, BRT signal priority doesn't really work because a)things get screwed up during gridlock and b)politicians can turn off the signal priority. This actually happened in Cleveland.

mhays Jan 6, 2022 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by homebucket (Post 9495468)

Did you forget to link something? You posted one existing example, and another new one, both in DTLA, with nothing for the rest of the city.

My point is LA could criss-cross the city with many bus-only lanes, all over town. This would be useful because buses get caught in traffic all over town. I don't know how I can make this any simpler for you.

Lanes like this exist in many cities and they're very effective. Even if there's a light, buses are first in line.

dktshb Jan 6, 2022 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by homebucket (Post 9494050)
I think this has got a lot to do with it. DTLA still has far too many surface parking lots and garages. In fact, one of their recent proposals is building a residential tower on top of an existing garage, rather than tearing it down and starting from scratch. Lots of new towers in South Park but they're all on massive parking podiums. Seems like DTLA has been adding more parking rather than decreasing it. I bet if you eliminated 50% of parking downtown, public transit usage rate would increase dramatically. Make parking more difficult and people will have no choice but to take the train into DTLA.

There are too many surface lots and parking podiums downtown. Fortunately now there are a few structures in the pipeline that do no include parking. Regarding the tower you're referring to to be built, the first 3 floors of that parking structure is a Macy's.

homebucket Jan 6, 2022 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhays (Post 9495505)
Did you forget to link something? You posted one existing example, and another new one, both in DTLA, with nothing for the rest of the city.

My point is LA could criss-cross the city with many bus-only lanes, all over town. This would be useful because buses get caught in traffic all over town. I don't know how I can make this any simpler for you.

Lanes like this exist in many cities and they're very effective. Even if there's a light, buses are first in line.

I'm not sure why you keep moving the goalposts. I think I already provided sufficient evidence. Unfortunately I don't have the time to look up and show you every bus lane on every bus route in the greater LA area.

I'm actually in agreement with you that improvements can be made. I was just simply stating that the bus system is already robust.

mhays Jan 6, 2022 11:04 PM

Ok, I had a spare 45 seconds. In a central 80 square miles or so, there's not much.

https://la.streetsblog.org/2021/09/1...o-coming-soon/
https://la.streetsblog.org/2021/09/1...o-coming-soon/


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.