Shame on los angeles. (San Francisco, Long Beach: house, income, taxes)

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by matt345

Really? It’s that bad? Now I know SF has a higher crime rate than Seattle or San Diego, but I’ve never thought of the place as being dangerous, especially when compared with two East Coast cities I grew up around. As of right now, San Francisco, a city of 800,000, has recorded somewhere around 45 homicides for 2009. Compare that with DC, a city of 600,000 that has recorded 134 homicides in 2009; or Baltimore, a city of 630,000 that has 215 homicides in 2009.

You are correct. I was speaking from my west coast perspective. I was also thinking specifically of San Diego and Seattle, two cities which are "relatively" safe. I feel perfectly safe in Seattle and San Diego at night in most places, even the downtown areas. This is so not the case with San Francisco, or LA for that matter.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale

Why do people continue to say this? I guess it's ignorance.

You're actually safer in a modern subway tunnel than you are above ground in a big city.

This is very true. During the 1989 Loma Prieta quake, there was very little, if any damage to the BART system in the Bay Area. Even the underwater tube was found to be ok after inspection.

[John23]

Really good post.

I think a sense of freedom would revolutionize LA. I agree that mass transit doesn't connect the places that need to be connected.

Where to get the money for a subway? Take it from our abysmal school system. No need to keep wasting money there. How much has per student spending gone up over the years? With what results?!?

Where did San Fransico get the money for the BART line? The point I think is, in other cities, you can get to point A to point B quickly and efficiently.

-LAX is a total embarrassment. Has anyone seen the airports in places like Orlando, Dallas, or any number of other cities? LAX is a relic out of a time machine.

-Freeway lighting I don't understand. Another infrastructure issue.

-To be fair, hollywood has been on the up and up. Compare it to the 80's, lol. Like the Kodak theater, Hollywood and Highland. To be fair, some of the excitment and fanfare that would go to hollywood has gotten dispersed to other areas like santa monica, century city, the grove, etc.

[Gentoo]

Where did San Fransico get the money for the BART line?

No disrespect intended. But this oversimplifies the Bay Area. San Francisco is it's own city and county. The way it worked for BART is that each county that BART would serve would pitch in and pay for it. These Counties were Mainly Alameda, Contra Costa and the city and County of San Francisco. San Mateo County didn't really put much at all into BART. For that reason for many years, BART only went as far as Daly City. Oringally, BART was supposed to serve Marin County as well but for one reason or another, Marin County did not participate so for this reason BART does not serve places like San Rafael. San Mateo County later got more on board and now Bart goes all the way to Millbrae. From what I hear, plans are also in the works to extend it down to San Jose so my guess is that Santa Clara County must have pitched in.

Basically you've made a good point. The Bay Area consist of 9 counties and in the case of BART, that's how it's paid for. Now I'm going to speculate and guess that this could be the case in New York as well? The 5 boroughs of New York City are in 5 counties; New York County (Manhattan), Kings County (Brooklyn), Queens County (Queens), Bronx County (Bronx) and Richmond County (Staten Island). In Los Angeles, only one county is available to absorb costs. The rest has to be received by any cities served. However I think if LA can pay for a celebrities funeral (no offense to MJ fans, I'm one too), then they can figure out how to pay for basic infrastructure needs.

[uptown_urbanist]

I agree that the SF comparison isn't really fair. BART is wonderful if you live along the route, much as the LA's Red Line, Blue Line, Gold Line, etc., are also wonderful if you live along the route. BART costs much more than the trains in LA, though, and if you live in SF and want to go a relatively short distance across town -- say from the Richmond District to the Mission -- it can take forever. Getting around within the city of San Francisco can often be extremely frustrating. Ironically the public transportation system worked better for us in LA than in SF, thanks in part to where we lived (in LA we had both rail and rapid bus connections; the Rapids are great!). Our SF neighborhood had a lot of what we needed within walking distance which made up for some of the downfalls, but connecting to BART, Caltrain, etc., was a major hassle.

The point isn't that SF's public transportation isn't good, but rather that it suffers from a lot of problems, too, and that getting from point A to point B isn't necessarily all that easy there, either. SF's strengths are in getting around the various counties by BART, but some of the more local transportation could use some major improvements. Unfortunately San Francisco faces budget problems, just like everyone else. (SF's muni, for example, is set to totally revamp its schedules, including eliminating some routes, this weekend)

LA's big problem is that the Westside and Santa Monica are totally cut off from any rail service; given that so many people do live and work in those areas that's obviously a major problem, and it's encouraging to see that there is finally movement to correct that. Many other parts of the LA area are fairly well served, though.

[WestSideGirl310]

Manhattan is the 'upscale' borough of NYC. Many of the people that you will see walking the streets in Manhattan are tourists and people that commute into the city for work. The rest of the boroughs (Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx and Staten island) aren't anything like Manhattan and can have some very run down areas occupied by many non-english speaking residents.

[Jonah1979]

I need to correct some folks on the railway system here in LA. Someone made the comment that LA "got a late start". That couldn't be farther from the truth. Ever hear of the Huntington Rail way? It was the most extensive railway system of any city in the world at the time. But guess what? LA tore it up and built freeways!

Los Angeles Railway in Brief

Los Angeles Railway in Brief

You can do your own search on the Internet about it. Infact there was a good documentary about it that I saw a year ago and it was amazing where it went. Too bad they didn't keep it and expand it's possibilities.

[stillkit]

Originally Posted by John23

-LAX is a total embarrassment. Has anyone seen the airports in places like Orlando, Dallas, or any number of other cities? LAX is a relic out of a time machine.

Your plane lands safely, gets to the gate, you disembark and leave the airport. What else is necessary?

[Charles]

Originally Posted by stillkit

Your plane lands safely, gets to the gate, you disembark and leave the airport. What else is necessary?

Cleanliness would be a nice touch.

[stillkit]

Originally Posted by Jonah1979

I need to correct some folks on the railway system here in LA. Someone made the comment that LA "got a late start". That couldn't be farther from the truth. Ever hear of the Huntington Rail way? It was the most extensive railway system of any city in the world at the time. But guess what? LA tore it up and built freeways!

Los Angeles Railway in Brief

Los Angeles Railway in Brief

You can do your own search on the Internet about it. Infact there was a good documentary about it that I saw a year ago and it was amazing where it went. Too bad they didn't keep it and expand it's possibilities.

Thanks for the info, but public transportation in NYC far predates that.

Elevated and subterranean trains go as far back as 1867 and there were horse-drawn carriages or cable cars even before that.

As for the electric trollies which ran in LA? Most major cities had those during the same period. In fact, Dallas had them within my lifetime and I'm only 60. I can well remember electrified transit busses. Additionally, there was a totally electric railroad, called the Interurban (Or, Texas Electric Railroad) which carried passengers around the Dallas/Ft.Worth area and even as far away as Denison, Waco and Wichita Falls. Many urban areas had something similar. It ceased operation about the time I was born, but the tracks remain in many places.

Why cities and urban areas dropped those conveniences? I can't say, but believe it had something to do with the cheap availability of automobiles in the post-WWII era.