HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2901  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 8:13 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quixote View Post
it's hard to get too excited about the snails pace of change in LA.

LA might offer decent urbanism for someone born today. for anyone old enough to browse these forums, you won't be able to witness a genuinely connected LA in your productive lifetimes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2902  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 3:28 PM
Jaycruz Jaycruz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
it's hard to get too excited about the snails pace of change in LA.

LA might offer decent urbanism for someone born today. for anyone old enough to browse these forums, you won't be able to witness a genuinely connected LA in your productive lifetimes.
Eh...... You cant really make that assumption. Its not like all of LAs new metro lines are subways. The only one being constructed and planned is the purple line. Every other line under construction and currently planned is Light rail. A genuinely connected LA will naturally take a while for 3 big reasons.

1. Constructing these lines cost more now.

2. the city is barely starting to create a solid metro system within a city that is completely build up and full of people (aka nimbys) and obstacles. It doesn't have the luxury like other cities did back in the early 1900s of building in less populated areas and cities having the control to tear down whatever they needed to get what they want done. Building a subway a 100 years ago in a less dense LA would have been far cheaper yes, but would you really feel safe in a subway system being built in a time when earthquakes were still misunderstood.

3. LA grew up in a time when gas was cheap, freeways were the new way of transit and everyone wanted a single family home which meant LA spread out and continued to spread until recently. So connecting the entire metro is going to take a while. I give it 20-30 years before most of LA is connected, granted mostly by light rail.

I think some of you guys need to give LA more credit than you are. Im an east coast transplant and I feel some portions of LA are VERY urban. Makes me wonder if some of you have ever left the city of LA to actually be able to compare it to other cities. To the eyes of this Midwest/east coast transplant, LA is doing just fine.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2903  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 8:50 PM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,068
In 20-30 years, most of LA will certainly not be connected. We already know which lines will be built by then, if they actually get done. It'll be an impressive amount considering where we were at before and how much has gotten done, but it still will look nothing like what is needed for a metropolis of 20+ million people. Dozens of dense corridors still won't have transit, the SFV will still be mostly neglected, OC doesn't seem like it really wants to play ball, the IE will basically have nothing, etc. The system won't be a real game changer by then.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2904  
Old Posted Sep 25, 2014, 5:25 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaycruz View Post
Eh...... You cant really make that assumption. Its not like all of LAs new metro lines are subways. The only one being constructed and planned is the purple line. Every other line under construction and currently planned is Light rail. A genuinely connected LA will naturally take a while for 3 big reasons.

1. Constructing these lines cost more now.

2. the city is barely starting to create a solid metro system within a city that is completely build up and full of people (aka nimbys) and obstacles. It doesn't have the luxury like other cities did back in the early 1900s of building in less populated areas and cities having the control to tear down whatever they needed to get what they want done. Building a subway a 100 years ago in a less dense LA would have been far cheaper yes, but would you really feel safe in a subway system being built in a time when earthquakes were still misunderstood.

3. LA grew up in a time when gas was cheap, freeways were the new way of transit and everyone wanted a single family home which meant LA spread out and continued to spread until recently. So connecting the entire metro is going to take a while. I give it 20-30 years before most of LA is connected, granted mostly by light rail.

I think some of you guys need to give LA more credit than you are. Im an east coast transplant and I feel some portions of LA are VERY urban. Makes me wonder if some of you have ever left the city of LA to actually be able to compare it to other cities. To the eyes of this Midwest/east coast transplant, LA is doing just fine.

LA isn't a dude who "deserves credit for working hard". It's a city. A backwards and dysfunctional one at that. There's no moral victory when the incremental change we've seen provides no reailstic impact to virtually every angeleno. I find it stupid when forumers "defend" the shitty state of affairs in LA by using some moral platitude about how LA has "come a long way" using "what it's got". Let me ask you, does that moral platitude make car-free living more plausible? does that moral platitude cut greenhouse gases? does it improve urban design and walkability? no, it just allows you to stick your head in the sand. a moral victory won't affect change, sorry.

the fact remains, a handful of geeks on SSP aren't going to make a difference even if all twenty-three of them sell their cars and donate 4 hrs of their waking hours riding our horrible transit network to support the metro cause as if it were some charity in dire need of patrons. because let's be honest, that's not that far from the truth.

ans i'm not making an assumption about anything. Like sethjeff said, we already know exactly what is or isn't going to be built in 20-30 years. and it's pathetic. and so is LA. and so will it be in 20-30 years. sorry that the truth hurts.

Last edited by edluva; Sep 25, 2014 at 5:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2905  
Old Posted Sep 25, 2014, 6:01 AM
upward 2000 upward 2000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 403
And only the existing freeway systems to handle any large increase in the future population. As for the subway/bus situation. Several extensions of existing lines that seem to be all we got to help with that. Am i missing anything in addition to that? Now did anyone hear that the population here is due to increase by the equivalent of Chicago and Houston over the next 20 years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2906  
Old Posted Sep 25, 2014, 5:33 PM
DenseCityPlease's Avatar
DenseCityPlease DenseCityPlease is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: California
Posts: 77
There's too much black and white thinking going on here with regard to the transit system. It's not as though the city is either "connected" or "unconnected", or that the city will be an urban wasteland until we achieve some mythical level of alpha world city "connection".

Bottom line: I think people are misunderstanding Metro's long-term plan. The real goal is not for every last square mile of Los Angeles to be walkable and transit friendly, but rather to create a rail network that links to each of the twenty or so major employment centers and high density neighborhoods in the county. In this regard, the rail system is approximately halfway to its goal and that is a major accomplishment.

The idea is that for people who live and work in one of these density nodes (a demographic that will eventually represent a majority of all residents, as the nodes are effectively the only places where infill development is allowed), they will be able to live a car-lite or car-free lifestyle very easily. Meanwhile those residents who live outside the nodes will have the option of using the bus system, which is actually a feeder to the rail system. Alternatively they could of course drive as they do now.

Think of an ideal Los Angeles not as one giant swath of walkable urbanity served by transit, which it never will be, but rather a "shotgun blast" where interconnected nodes of urbanity break up the underlying fabric of low-density residential neighborhoods.

The fabled tipping point will be when the population living in dense, urban nodes and (mostly) traveling by rail begins to approach the population living in the sprawl. Until then the city's level of connectivity should be viewed in shades of grey.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2907  
Old Posted Sep 25, 2014, 9:29 PM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Sonoma Strong
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,882
^ Wise words. As an outsider, I would definitely say LA has come a long way.
__________________
"I firmly believe, from what I have seen, that this is the chosen spot of all this Earth as far as Nature is concerned." - Luther Burbank on Sonoma County.

Pictures of Santa Rosa, So. Co.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2908  
Old Posted Sep 25, 2014, 11:10 PM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
LA's transit system deserves--and rightly gets--both praise and criticism. It is making strides, but is very late to the game and has a very, very long road ahead of it.

When and where there are only boosters, homers and fanboys, a critic is a necessary tonic. This forum is such a place, so edluva serves a vital purpose.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2909  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2014, 12:21 AM
Muji's Avatar
Muji Muji is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 1,183
LADOT recently released its new Strategic Plan: Great Streets for Los Angeles.

Given the status quo, many of its provisions are surprisingly progressive, including a Vision Zero initiative to "eliminate" LA traffic deaths by 2025. Streetsblog LA has a nice writeup on this particular proposal. Link: http://la.streetsblog.org/2014/09/30...eaths-by-2025/

Curbed LA's writeup is mostly excited about some changes that LADOT is planning to implement in the next few years. Link:http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/0...eets_of_la.php

Quote:
Eight Amazing Changes on the Way to the Streets of LA
Bianca Barragan
September 30, 2014



[...]

We've combed through for eight of the coolest changes we could see hit the streets over the next several years.

· No more insane-o, towering parking signs. Great Streets is looking to "develop [a] clearer parking sign system for easier interpretation by motorists" that will also include standardization of signage.
· A seven-year "rolling meter upgrade cycle" to keep up with the latest parking meter technology.
· A crackdown on the jerks who misuse disabled placards to park for free at meters.
· Re-time 400 crosswalk signals a year, to make it so that people have enough time to cross the street.
· Order all new DASH buses with bike racks and have 75 new DASH buses with racks on the road by 2017.
· Take LA ExpressPark to Venice by 2017; the parking program keeps tabs on where spaces are available and adjusts prices according to availability, and has been a success in Downtown already.
· Add benches, trees, better sidewalks at high-volume bus stops that are in need of such additions. There are also plans to install real-time arrival information at a handful of stops.
· Expand the hail-a-cab program, which allows people to hail taxis on the street rather than having to wait at a taxi stand, to four more pilot business districts across the city.
__________________
My blog of then and now photos of LA: http://urbandiachrony.wordpress.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2910  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2014, 6:40 PM
Jaycruz Jaycruz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 219
Quote:
Originally Posted by StethJeff View Post
In 20-30 years, most of LA will certainly not be connected. We already know which lines will be built by then, if they actually get done. It'll be an impressive amount considering where we were at before and how much has gotten done, but it still will look nothing like what is needed for a metropolis of 20+ million people. Dozens of dense corridors still won't have transit, the SFV will still be mostly neglected, OC doesn't seem like it really wants to play ball, the IE will basically have nothing, etc. The system won't be a real game changer by then.
I was only talking about LA. The O.C and I.E. are 2 totally different counties and 2 different ways of thinking. Yeah since I've been here there really is no true distinction between the counties, I get that. Now take away the O.C. and the I.E. from the map and the plans going on for LA county is actually linking the county together. Not all is connected, true, still some corridors that need to be connected, true, But in regards to LA county on its on as someone else mentioned, the goal of linking all major hub centers is working. Now the construction of feeder lines to the major lines will come naturally i'm sure. Yeah the SFV is lacking but isn't the bus line being considered for Light Rail ? and I thought there was a plan to extend the redline to bob hope ?

Yeah I understand that we already know what's planned for the next 20-30 years. But things change. Just because metro has laid out plans for the foreseeable future doesn't mean those exact plans are set in stone. That's like saying the future is already set when we all know the future is unforeseeable. LA got Measure R. Than a couple years later Measure R2, or whatever its named now. I'm pretty sure metro isn't thinking of the resounding success of its metro plans to be able to sit on their A$$ and pat themselves on the back. Just because its not being posted on online or there hasn't been a town hall meeting for it yet doesn't mean metro isn't already in the works for other plans for extensions and gap fillers. Metro sees that the people of LA are serious about expanding transit and i'm sure they are already planning out other lines, extensions and upgrades for the next measure.

But just for the hell of it. Your right. a better connected metro, rather than a county, the O.C needs to jump on board and the I.E. needs to jump on board.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2911  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2014, 3:15 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,068
/\ /\ /\ That's cute. You must be new here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2912  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2014, 9:53 PM
Eightball's Avatar
Eightball Eightball is offline
life is good
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: all over
Posts: 2,301
What's the word on signal priority for the expo line on the part (near downtown) where it stops at traffic lights and what not. Ridiculous!

And getting rid of all the huge one way streets downtown? I browsed that (otherwise impressive) report but didn't see anything on it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2913  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2014, 7:39 PM
LAofAnaheim LAofAnaheim is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 761
In 30 years, what parts of Los Angeles (specially LA County, not OC or IE) will NOT be connected by any Metro Rail? Outside the SFV, which shot itself in the foot with the Robbins Bill, you could get anywhere in Los Angeles, especially the LA basin where the densest part of Los Angeles exists, by Metro Rail.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2914  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2014, 7:57 PM
LAsam LAsam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,767
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAofAnaheim View Post
In 30 years, what parts of Los Angeles (specially LA County, not OC or IE) will NOT be connected by any Metro Rail? Outside the SFV, which shot itself in the foot with the Robbins Bill, you could get anywhere in Los Angeles, especially the LA basin where the densest part of Los Angeles exists, by Metro Rail.
Is there a plan to put rail through the Venice, Marina del Rey, Playa del Rey corridor along the beach? I can't recall seeing anything.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2915  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2014, 12:18 AM
DenseCityPlease's Avatar
DenseCityPlease DenseCityPlease is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: California
Posts: 77
^ All three of those communities would likely be served by the proposed northward extension of the Green Line from LAX to Santa Monica via Lincoln Boulevard.

I don't believe this route is in the official 2009 Long Range Plan, but it has been widely discussed among both armchair enthusiasts like us and the actual leadership at Metro. I wouldn't be surprised if it appeared on the proposal map for Measure R part deux.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2916  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2014, 4:43 PM
LAsam LAsam is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,767
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenseCityPlease View Post
^ All three of those communities would likely be served by the proposed northward extension of the Green Line from LAX to Santa Monica via Lincoln Boulevard.

I don't believe this route is in the official 2009 Long Range Plan, but it has been widely discussed among both armchair enthusiasts like us and the actual leadership at Metro. I wouldn't be surprised if it appeared on the proposal map for Measure R part deux.
That would be a welcome addition. They'd have to elevate the line though since Lincoln is a complete disaster already and I don't believe they have a ROW parallel to it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2917  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2014, 8:08 PM
Eightball's Avatar
Eightball Eightball is offline
life is good
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: all over
Posts: 2,301
This is sad, wtf?

Labor Dispute Kills Kinkisharyo’s AV Plant
http://www.sfvbj.com/news/2014/oct/1...ryos-av-plant/
Quote:
Kinkisharyo International LLC has scrapped plans to build a rail car manufacturing plant in Palmdale following a labor dispute and will instead look outside California to locate the facility.

The Japanese company made the decision after failing to reach an agreement with Antelope Valley Residents for Responsible Development, a labor-supported group that objected to the plant citing environmental reasons.

The group, which includes members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local No. 11, in Pasadena, also objected to a backup plan by Kinkisharyo to build the cars in leased space from Los Angeles World Airports in Palmdale...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2918  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2014, 8:33 PM
Steve2726's Avatar
Steve2726 Steve2726 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: L.A.
Posts: 482
Thumbs down

^^^

Pretty standard stuff unfortunately. California's extremist anti-business climate strikes again. If people keep voting for the "pro Labor" (ironic name isn't it....) candidates, this is what you get.

Last edited by Steve2726; Oct 14, 2014 at 8:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2919  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2014, 8:47 PM
Eightball's Avatar
Eightball Eightball is offline
life is good
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: all over
Posts: 2,301
Not sure I agree that CA is anti-business, but yeah, this is terrible. What was the issue with the backup option? Seems like the Union is acting stupidly. Gov Brown should step in, mediate and keep this business in the state.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2920  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2014, 9:31 PM
Steve2726's Avatar
Steve2726 Steve2726 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: L.A.
Posts: 482
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:10 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.