Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-31-2014, 01:01 PM
 
152 posts, read 210,841 times
Reputation: 120

Advertisements

Quote:
LA's subway and lightrail is no more dangerous than anywhere else.
This. The DASH buses are also highly underrated, but that's probably why they're so nice. People are so caught up in their misconceptions about "the dangers and filth of public transportation" that they are scared to use public transit, even though it keeps getting better and better (and safer).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-31-2014, 01:11 PM
 
Location: London, NYC & LA
861 posts, read 847,307 times
Reputation: 725
No, because LA is already a car centric city. It is already too sprawling due to its' historical reliance on the car.

As other posters have said it would need to be pretty extensive to make an impact on actual car usage.

We would need about 5 more lines probably double the current line distances. Then you would have the optimum line length problem to deal with. In that the longer the line gets, the greater the probability that people getting on closer to the central conurbations will never actually get a seat.

In NYC and London, the development of the subway was at the same time as the rise of the motor car, it resulted in more compact and efficient cities. Arguably the trolleybus system had the same unintended effect on SF.

But in LA the car reigned supreme so sprawling suburbs were built everywhere.. They didnt need to be clustered around key railway lines or stations..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 01:11 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA (Ladera Heights)
496 posts, read 571,037 times
Reputation: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwright1 View Post
LA's subway and lightrail is no more dangerous than anywhere else. And I when went looking at places to live thru the years, I only looked at and lived in places close to excellent public transportation including LA. I honestly can't imagine living in places that don't have this. If downtown did not have the abundant transportation options that it has today it would not be as appealing to developers, companies or residents. The Expo Line expansion to the sea will be a game changer.
yea, thats what i think!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 02:33 PM
 
105 posts, read 168,987 times
Reputation: 348
I just can't use public transportation due to having to put up with a lot of weirdos that are always present. I prefer my car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 02:43 PM
 
Location: Buena Park, Orange County, California
1,424 posts, read 2,473,957 times
Reputation: 1545
Quote:
Originally Posted by nograviti View Post
No, because LA is already a car centric city. It is already too sprawling due to its' historical reliance on the car.

As other posters have said it would need to be pretty extensive to make an impact on actual car usage.

We would need about 5 more lines probably double the current line distances. Then you would have the optimum line length problem to deal with. In that the longer the line gets, the greater the probability that people getting on closer to the central conurbations will never actually get a seat.

In NYC and London, the development of the subway was at the same time as the rise of the motor car, it resulted in more compact and efficient cities. Arguably the trolleybus system had the same unintended effect on SF.

But in LA the car reigned supreme so sprawling suburbs were built everywhere.. They didnt need to be clustered around key railway lines or stations..
Except L.A.s best known suburbs, from Pasadena to Santa Ana etc etc, were all connected (and grew due to) by the extensive red streetcar (yellow streetcars in downtown) system. It is only the newest of suburbs (like in South Orange County, and just about anything post 1950's) that are planned out/sprawled in completely car dependent fashions. Otherwise, just about all cities from Anaheim to Glendale, have some form of historic old town/main street that was easily accessible via public transportation. People would take the streetcar to downtown from cities that you can't even access metro with nowadays.

Essentially, our metro system has a long way to go to reach the glory days of its own past. For some reason, I keep assuming that people have some general basic knowledge of our history (LA's)...but comments like yours (that assume a lot) tell me otherwise.

Map of the Pacific Electric Railway (red streetcar system):

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 03:00 PM
 
Location: Buena Park, Orange County, California
1,424 posts, read 2,473,957 times
Reputation: 1545
One anomaly to consider when it comes to the correlation between metro expansion and gentrification is the Blue line. The communities that the line crosses DEFINITELY benefit from it, as they use it heavily for a primary mode of transportation between job centers in Long Beach and downtown Los Angeles. Nonetheless, as far as those communities go, I haven't seen much in the form of gentrification (or, shall we call it: redevelopment?).

Perhaps those communities don't have the finances necessary to do so? Or why aren't more people in those areas moving to be closer to a metro station?

Also, how about the Green Line? Is the working class (and one that is heavily suburban in character) nature of those communities keeping from organizing around better public transportation and housing developments oriented towards that lifestyle? Or perhaps the center of gravity when it comes to jobs for them is somewhere else? I think people that live in those areas are probably more likely to work in places like Sante Fe Springs/City of Industry/Commerce and Orange County? Places where the metro currently doesn't take them (and won't for a VERY long time.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 03:25 PM
 
Location: London, NYC & LA
861 posts, read 847,307 times
Reputation: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by RudyOD View Post
Except L.A.s best known suburbs, from Pasadena to Santa Ana etc etc, were all connected (and grew due to) by the extensive red streetcar (yellow streetcars in downtown) system. It is only the newest of suburbs (like in South Orange County, and just about anything post 1950's) that are planned out/sprawled in completely car dependent fashions. Otherwise, just about all cities from Anaheim to Glendale, have some form of historic old town/main street that was easily accessible via public transportation. People would take the streetcar to downtown from cities that you can't even access metro with nowadays.

Essentially, our metro system has a long way to go to reach the glory days of its own past. For some reason, I keep assuming that people have some general basic knowledge of our history (LA's)...but comments like yours (that assume a lot) tell me otherwise.

Map of the Pacific Electric Railway (red streetcar system):
Perhaps, but the streetcar was in decline even as early as the 40s. I agree there are hints of LA's more centralised past when you look at its downtown area..

But even when you speak of Anaheim the furthest extremities of such areas are not walkable in an east coast sense. That is the issue which makes the situation in LA unique..

Combined with the fact that a car economy has risen up in the wake of the decline of such public services. It will take a change in the public consciousness and a lot more development to reach and surpass was was really a relatively limited system compared to mass transit systems like that in New York City today..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 03:35 PM
 
Location: Buena Park, Orange County, California
1,424 posts, read 2,473,957 times
Reputation: 1545
Quote:
Originally Posted by nograviti View Post
Perhaps, but the streetcar was in decline even as early as the 40s. I agree there are hints of LA's more centralised past when you look at its downtown area..

But even when you speak of Anaheim the furthest extremities of such areas are not walkable in an east coast sense. That is the issue which makes the situation in LA unique..

Combined with the fact that a car economy has risen up in the wake of the decline of such public services. It will take a change in the public consciousness and a lot more development to reach and surpass was was really a relatively limited system compared to mass transit systems like that in New York City today..
Definitely agree on this. We have to keep in mind that no matter how much light rail you built, it won't necessarily change the culture overall. We do have counter examples, where little rail is available, but we have a visible walking/pedestrian culture, at least at the neighborhood level, in cities like Long Beach. People in Long Beach (in neighborhoods like Broadway, California Heights/Bixby Knolls, Belmont Shore, Belmont Heights, Retro Row/Fourth Street etc) are very likely to walk to a local cafe/bar/restaurant or even grocery store...and only its downtown area has any type of light rail, and people don't use the bus that often, preferring to drive their own vehicle for anything outside their neighborhood or even ride a bike. Compare Long Beach neighborhoods to OC neighborhoods though (where no one walks anywhere, except for within a mall), and you notice the shift in mindsets. Cities like Long Beach, Santa Monica and Pasadena have the progressive mindset and culture to move towards a less car oriented future, but I'm not sure how true this is for much of the Southland.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 04:44 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA (Ladera Heights)
496 posts, read 571,037 times
Reputation: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by RudyOD View Post
Except L.A.s best known suburbs, from Pasadena to Santa Ana etc etc, were all connected (and grew due to) by the extensive red streetcar (yellow streetcars in downtown) system. It is only the newest of suburbs (like in South Orange County, and just about anything post 1950's) that are planned out/sprawled in completely car dependent fashions. Otherwise, just about all cities from Anaheim to Glendale, have some form of historic old town/main street that was easily accessible via public transportation. People would take the streetcar to downtown from cities that you can't even access metro with nowadays.

Essentially, our metro system has a long way to go to reach the glory days of its own past. For some reason, I keep assuming that people have some general basic knowledge of our history (LA's)...but comments like yours (that assume a lot) tell me otherwise.

Map of the Pacific Electric Railway (red streetcar system):
love the history!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2014, 04:46 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA (Ladera Heights)
496 posts, read 571,037 times
Reputation: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by RudyOD View Post
One anomaly to consider when it comes to the correlation between metro expansion and gentrification is the Blue line. The communities that the line crosses DEFINITELY benefit from it, as they use it heavily for a primary mode of transportation between job centers in Long Beach and downtown Los Angeles. Nonetheless, as far as those communities go, I haven't seen much in the form of gentrification (or, shall we call it: redevelopment?).

Perhaps those communities don't have the finances necessary to do so? Or why aren't more people in those areas moving to be closer to a metro station?

Also, how about the Green Line? Is the working class (and one that is heavily suburban in character) nature of those communities keeping from organizing around better public transportation and housing developments oriented towards that lifestyle? Or perhaps the center of gravity when it comes to jobs for them is somewhere else? I think people that live in those areas are probably more likely to work in places like Sante Fe Springs/City of Industry/Commerce and Orange County? Places where the metro currently doesn't take them (and won't for a VERY long time.)
the problem with the green line is that it is mostly on the 105 freeway. So that's a bigger difference the metro being more closely related to the street where its easier to put apartments and such.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top