UGH! Los Angeles traffic is ridiculous!!! (Santa Monica, West Hollywood: buying, salaries, live in)

[Chicano3000X]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

Our mass transit system is brain dead. Let's say I live in Newhall and I want to get to Santa Monica.

In my car I get on the 14 -> I-5 -> 405 and over the hill, then get off at one of the Santa Monica off ramps.

But if I want to take the train there is a local station to Newhall, but then what? First I have to go to downtown L.A. .... and then what?

I don't live in Newhall, was just using that is an example. The problem is our mass transit system is dysfunctional. It's radial, not gridded. Most routes demand you go downtown first, then back out on a different line. Either that or you have several transfers, turning your public transit commute into 4x longer than via auto.

You wanna live in L.A. you gotta accept massive freeway traffic or try to use a dysfunctional mass transit system.

Our transit system works only if there is an entry point near your home and your rail ride terminates within walking distance of your destination.

Always felt that we have the freeways mapped out. why not have the trains run along side.

"The 5 rail"

"The 405 train"

"The 101 line"

[Stevedore]

Los Angeles was originally never setup for rapid transit by rail, automobile industry you can thank for that. East coast completely different......what they've done in L.A. is essentially spend millions on a band aid. If you're going to do it, do it right; not half ass. The above poster is correct; have 3 or 4 major lines that run along the fwy's.

[DabOnEm]

Nah those lines should run along major boulevards and streets. Thats how you get people away from their cars. By placing the rail near businesses and homes.

[citizensadvocate]

If LA has a high capacity line today that runs between downtown Santa Monica down Wilshire blvd and continue east of downtown and Union station toward san Gabriel Valley with stops at each major street interchange on i10 until Baldwin Park it would likely to have been profitable today as it would have served the busiest and most dense commute corridor in the valley and connects to all other lines easily. Currently metro link and silver line skips these crowded population centers between El Monte and CSULA. And The gold line and expo line is built to far less dense areas and is much less convenient for users.

The purple line extension kinds of covers this much needed service west of koreatown but it still has quite a ways to go.

There are transit lines that are profitable in the US. The northeast corridor is an example. Though it's done by making train fares outrageously expensive compared to Amtrak elsewhere though I noticed that low fare bus lines running along side can turn a profit with low fares.

[Joewy]

Originally Posted by Stevedore

Los Angeles was originally never setup for rapid transit by rail, automobile industry you can thank for that. East coast completely different......what they've done in L.A. is essentially spend millions on a band aid. If you're going to do it, do it right; not half ass. The above poster is correct; have 3 or 4 major lines that run along the fwy's.

Sure it was. But then people found out that the trains and buses suck. So they abandoned them. We developed a rip roaring economy which relied in efficient transportation of goods and workers and the state and local governments at that time did not posses the power to just tax people for it. So Cars and freedom won for a time.
Anyhow. There will never be a realistic rapid transport system in Losangeles.

[citizensadvocate]

Also what should LA do to please its car loving community to reverse the nightmare situation that are carved by the freeway revolts west of downtown back in the 1960s? LA really needs a beltway around the city and some viaducts or underground roads to cover the gaps in the freeway plan to ease the traffic nightmare caused by an incomplete system nowadays. The current traffic nightmare is caused by a combination of inadequate roads and lack of public transportation, yet developers keep building more development. Whether its sprawling subdivisions in the outskirts or high density apartments/condos in the westside it all will just add fuel to the fire.

Another thing is they should rethink parking requirements. Instead of requiring on site private parking for all properties in high density areas. They should plan development based on how much "public parking" is available in the area. By public parking I mean parking facilities that may be either publicly or privately operated but is open to all who pay a fee such as AAmco parking. Downtown for example now has plenty of parking surrounding developments already therefore requiring minimum parking on site seems unnecessary.

[JustMike77]

Originally Posted by Mezter

I honestly don't see how you guys deal with it. I was stuck in traffic for 2 hours for a drive that Google maps said should be 35 minutes. I mean, I know LA has notoriously bad traffic, but it's much different when you actually experience it. There's literally no exaggeration at all...

It's all about timing. Yesterday it took me 90 minutes to go from Woodland Hills to the Marina at around 1:00 PM. Coming home at 10:00 PM it took 30 minutes. When they work as planned, the freeways are great, but when they don't they seriously suck. As for Calguy's proposal, I'm wondering if taking 1/7 th of the cars off the road each day is even enough.

[DawnW]

Originally Posted by JustMike77

It's all about timing. Yesterday it took me 90 minutes to go from Woodland Hills to the Marina at around 1:00 PM. Coming home at 10:00 PM it took 30 minutes. When they work as planned, the freeways are great, but when they don't they seriously suck. As for Calguy's proposal, I'm wondering if taking 1/7 th of the cars off the road each day is even enough.

It would be 1/5 th as he stated it would only be Mon-Fri.

[Western Urbanite]

Originally Posted by Lovehound

Our mass transit system is brain dead. Let's say I live in Newhall and I want to get to Santa Monica.

In my car I get on the 14 -> I-5 -> 405 and over the hill, then get off at one of the Santa Monica off ramps.

But if I want to take the train there is a local station to Newhall, but then what? First I have to go to downtown L.A. .... and then what?

You take the red/purple line to the expo line, which is often faster than driving.

Originally Posted by Lovehound

I don't live in Newhall, was just using that is an example. The problem is our mass transit system is dysfunctional. It's radial, not gridded. Most routes demand you go downtown first, then back out on a different line. Either that or you have several transfers, turning your public transit commute into 4x longer than via auto.

Exactly, which is why, in the next few decades, we'll have built this very gridded system:

[Western Urbanite]

Originally Posted by Chicano3000X

Always felt that we have the freeways mapped out. why not have the trains run along side.

"The 5 rail"

"The 405 train"

"The 101 line"

Not a good idea. People don't want to be right along the 405, 5, or 101. Its much better to keep building lines along major streets--Vermont, Wilshire, Santa Monica, LaBrea, Lincoln, etc.