Are LA's rail transit expansion plans enough to shift the city away from the car?

[pwright1]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

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.

Exactly. This is when great bus service comes to play. The 720 and 20 buses serve the Wilshire Corridor well. Along the Wilshire Corridor there are plenty of doorman, parking attendents, janitors, Westwood Cemetary employees, groundskeepers and others that ride the 720 and 20 buses which run frequently along the corridor.

[destroycreate]

Originally Posted by Crawford

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".

[mrnyc]

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]

Originally Posted by mrnyc

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]

Originally Posted by kittyhawk28

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.

[SAN Man]

Originally Posted by mrnyc

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

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.

[mrnyc]

Originally Posted by SAN Man

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.

perhaps, but they can be given right of way.

so could busses too tho.

the point of streetcars being to promote attractive, walkable neighborhoods, or improve those that exist, something los angeles desperately needs, rather than speed. unlike busses you could hop on and off more easily anywhere and you would get out at the subway if you wanted to get to dtla/union station fast.

i think its well worth a try at least, like first with a quieter street like along the main drag in los feliz, something like that, rather than start with than something much busier like say la cienega. just for proof of concept.

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by mrnyc

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.

Dang, you beat me to it. But still, to address the responses to this, there are many ways to accommodate streetcars and/busses to the transportation infrastructure so that they don't have to deal with the bullshit traffic.

In fact, the main thing that can push more people in LA to use public transportation over the car is to stress the shittiness of traffic. People will deal with it because they still love the independence their cars give ( I know that's my reasoning for driving over taking PT), but there are many days when it ain't worth sitting in the middle of rush hour not moving an inch.

Thus, the marketing team for LA's public transit better figure out how to make a good case. Some genius from Hollywood has to be among their ranks

But I am serious, traffic is a pain in the ass.

[Easy]

Originally Posted by mrnyc

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.

LA streetcars didn't work in 1960 and they really wouldn't work now. When they were built and LA only didn't have as many people they averaged 30mph. At the end after the population exploded, it was something like 14 mph. Now it would be more like 10 mph. The biggest issue though is that a minor fender bender on a street shuts the line down. They wouldn't be reliable. I wouldn't want that for LA.

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by Easy

LA streetcars didn't work in 1960 and they really wouldn't work now. When they were built and LA only didn't have as many people they averaged 30mph. At the end after the population exploded, it was something like 14 mph. Now it would be more like 10 mph. The biggest issue though is that a minor fender bender on a street shuts the line down. They wouldn't be reliable. I wouldn't want that for LA.

Interesting. I wonder if dedicated lanes would also be helpful. Either way, streetcars seemed to be the solution, since prewar LA was built for it.

I would be interested to know how fast Toronto’s streetcar system goes. Toronto seems to be a good analog to LA, also having a dense suburban layout.

Other than that, I can’t think of any other mode of mass transit that would work for LA to compete with the car. Nothing available right now (Metrorail, Buses, etc) comes close.

[SFBruin]

Originally Posted by jd3189

Interesting. I wonder if dedicated lanes would also be helpful. Either way, streetcars seemed to be the solution, since prewar LA was built for it.

I would be interested to know how fast Toronto’s streetcar system goes. Toronto seems to be a good analog to LA, also having a dense suburban layout.

Other than that, I can’t think of any other mode of mass transit that would work for LA to compete with the car. Nothing available right now (Metrorail, Buses, etc) comes close.

I think that grade-separated LRT is the answer for LA.

[mhays]

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.

[mhays]

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]

Originally Posted by mhays

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/

[mhays]

Originally Posted by homebucket

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

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

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.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by mhays

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.

[jmecklenborg]

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]

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/

[mhays]

Marketing is just part of it. I'll say it again....but lanes would speed the buses dramatically, as they've done in other cities. LA has very little bus-only infrastructure.

[Easy]

Originally Posted by mhays

Marketing is just part of it. I'll say it again....but lanes would speed the buses dramatically, as they've done in other cities. LA has very little bus-only infrastructure.

How fast are buses in LA compared to "other cities"?