Originally Posted By ArchtMig >>>You know, a lot of this could be solved if the region had a better public transportation network.<<< The problem is getting people from their homes to public transit stations, and then to their actual places of work after they get off public transit. Personal cars are still involved for at least part of the trip. There just isn't enough stations to serve all the areas where stations are needed, and there isn't any secondary transit to move people around once they get off primary transit. Southern Cal is just too wide and spread out to *effectively* cover with public transit. Plus, in LA, they waste money building super expensive underground subways, where if they did some sort of modern elevated transit, either monorails or other elevated people moving type system, they could probably get 4 times as many system miles for the money they spend digging these tubes in earthquake prone regions. But really, there is nothing as efficient for moving people around to the varied and widespread places they want to go, when they want to go, than the personal vehicle. I think the future solution will have to be smart, semi-autonomous cars, that are small and energy efficient, with the associated infrastructure (roads and parking) needed to support them. Mass transit is not a complete solution. And in wide-spread Southern California, it never will be.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>There is stuff there<< Oh really?!!! HARDLY! LOL I'm sad to say about my native OC ...... It is the WORST .. when it comes to mass transit systems! It's really a horrible situation. And I suppose busses stoping every 500 feet is a longterm solution. Something serious has to materialize soon. It's like gridlock situations in many locations. Try making your way on the San Diego Freeway between Culver and Brookhurst anywhere between 4pm and 8pm. Lets see how long it takes you to travel just that length!
Originally Posted By oc_dean Hey Arch .... regarding your entire post- THANK YOU! You said it brilliantly.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>The problem is getting people from their homes to public transit stations, and then to their actual places of work after they get off public transit. << OH .. I gotta give my experience: Here's my rigmarole path to get to my job- As I mentioned .. I use the Redline. In the perfect world .. I should be able to use the Hollywood & Vine station. No parking though! I have to drive out of my way .. for the sake of a parking space at the Universal Studios/Lankiershem terminal. Then the subway ride ... and fortunately .. a short walk to work. Takes me an hour. If I drove ... I can get to work in 15 minutes! 30 in the worst traffic on the Hollywood 101 Freeway!! It's examples like mine that make these 20th Century systems OBSOLETE! Why take slow busses .. walk .. another bus ... subway ..... walk some more ..... another bus .. and finally at your distination 1 .. 2 .. or 3 hours later? When .. by car .. even in bad traffic .. still takes less time! See ........ this why Southern Ca is never going to be able to move more efficiently anytime soon. As long as some of these transportation officials keep thinking one or two expensive underground subways .. and bus systems "magically" are going to move sufficient people around .. OC is going to look like some ancient dinosaur .. with one nice theme park resort in the center of it.
Originally Posted By oc_dean OHH! And I can't tell you how much I DETEST my "exodus" to get home! The wait at the subway station... the ride itself (never sufficient A/C, cramped, often have to stand .. after a long day!) The walk to the car ... the drive home. 60 minutes later .. I'm home! On the ocasional drive into work ... I'm home in 15-20 minutes! SUCKS! But I'm sure that's nothing .. to people who think of nothing to spend 2 hours each way .. each day! They have no life! Obsolete 20th Century transportation methods = Ride your car, you'll still have half a life!
Originally Posted By ChurroMonster ""I used to work at Universal Citywalk, similar to GardenWalk in many respects, and we did not have to pay for our own parking." What did you do there?" This was years ago. I worked at the (now-closed) restaurant Shanghai & Mein as a host and a busser.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>You know, a lot of this could be solved if the region had a better public transportation network.<< I second that one! OC and LA mass transit is useless unless you only need it at certain times in certain locations, or don't mind taking 2 hours for what is a 15 minute car trip. Yes, that's literally the case in getting me from my apartment to Disneyland. I've checked. And on weekends? Fuggedaboutit. I frequently go to weekend movie events in LA, and always check to see if it's feasible to take the train. Much easier, you know. Well, I've pulled it off exactly once - a screening at the Egyptian Theater in the middle of the day. Every other time, it would have involved either a 4-hour transit time via assorted busses or an overnight stay. The train schedules on weekends are too sparse to even fool with.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf Public transportation only works in high-density areas where hefty ridership allows for large numbers of routes with high frequencies of stops. Southern California was built and expanded on the freeway (aka urban sprawl) model. Low density suburbs and public transportation don't mix. Sorry guys, but it will never work in SoCal.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Low density suburbs >> I wouldn't describe any area of Southern California as low density.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf Compare LA suburbs to Manahattan, where public transportation works. There is a difference. LA has 1/4 the population density of NYC. While it may seem crowded, it's only because everything is spread out and everyone needs to drive a car (it's really only the streets that are crowded if you think about it). If you look around the streets, you don't see many people walking around. Compare that with truly densely populated areas and you'll see a big difference.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>Sorry guys, but it will never work in SoCal.<< You just might be right!! Something has gotta give though! I wonder what our region is going to look like in 2107 .. when transportation NEEDS are going to far exceed our obsolete 20th century set-up!
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt >>Sorry guys, but it will never work in SoCal.<< While the Bay Area's population isn't quite as dispersed as in the LA/Orange County area, I think the success of BART as a subway/commuter rail hybrid proves that mass transit can work in urban sprawl. Because of the congestion caused by the bridges and tunnels here, millions of people are happy to bypass traffic using BART's high-speed rail network.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf There are some big differences. You only have three roads that take you into San Francisco: 80 from the east and 101 from the north and south. BART is used mainly by folks trying to get in and out of the city, not by people trying to get from Concord to Walnut Creek. Therefore, you have several stations feeding essentially into only one destination rather than mutliple to multiple. And San Francisco itself is relatively compact so one could walk from a station to just about anywhere. While I would like to think the BART model could work in SoCal, I don't think it's realistic.
Originally Posted By mawnck OC has plenty of routes and stops. They just don't have buses that stop at them. Real world example: I was trying to get from my apartment to John Wayne Airport this coming Sunday morning via OCTA. Transit time was not an issue - I would have been perfectly happy spending an hour or two on the buses and at the stops to avoid the parking fees. Turns out there are only two routes serving John Wayne. One doesn't run on weekends, and the other's first arrival at the airport isn't until 8:30 - which is after my flight leaves. You'd think that, regardless of urban sprawl or BART model or whatever, they might run at least ONE bus to John Wayne whenever it's open. Nope.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "You only have three roads that take you into San Francisco: 80 from the east and 101 from the north and south." I mentioned, or alluded to this. "BART is used mainly by folks trying to get in and out of the city, not by people trying to get from Concord to Walnut Creek." And how why would a system built around central LA configuration be different? I get that the regions aren't the same, but I wouldn't rule out high-speed rail because of it. One only has to look at other large metropolitan areas like Paris and Tokyo to see that this is true. "And San Francisco itself is relatively compact so one could walk from a station to just about anywhere." San Francisco is 49 square miles, roughly the same size as WDW, and extremely hilly in some places, so you cannot walk just about anywhere.
Originally Posted By bean I think the system has problems and needs to be expanded. I take the metrolink to and from work and the trains are always packed. Biggest problem is lack of trains available. Most trains run one way in the morning and the opposite way in the evening and they start and stop at certain times. For exampe the rains i take start running at 4:45am and second one does not run till 6:00am. then its every 1/2 hour till 8:00am. Those trains are busy but they could easily have thousands more if they continued running past that hour. In the evening the first train runs the opposite way at 1:15pm (to early for most commute but still full with students and other people. Then not until 4:30pm and then every 1/2 hour till 6:50pm. The 6:50pm train is still too early for many commuters. Many times i have seen people board the train then expect return trains like in Chicago and New York then realize that they are stuck miles away with no return trains till the next day. Biggest problem is that some of those tracks are own by Pacific railroad and they control the tracks. So cargo trains take priority of the tracks and leave little room for more commuting lines. Then the next problem is that some station have no alternate transportation. Once you are there there are no buses to take you anywhere. The ones that do have buses scheduled to leave minutes before the train arrives forcing people to wait up to an hour for the next bus. Other problems are just bad plannning. They now offer buses from the La unon station to the airport so that you could leave car there and take rapid bus to airport. Yet the same metrolink lines runs a mile from the Ontario International airport and offers no buses or shuttles. Actually there are more than one line that runs a mile or two from major airports and do not have shutles. It would make taking trips so much easer without having to drive to airports. I really think the best system would had been to just add a middle center overhead monorail route over every freeway. They could add strategic stops every certain miles with adeqaute parking and have shuttles take people to central bus and shuttle hubs. The city of Montebello right now offers shuttles free of charge for any metrolink riders. All you do is sign up and get assigned to one of the several routes that take people allover the city. Those shuttles take several hundred metrolink riders to the closest spot of the work place and most people walk a simple block or two. If more cities adopted that it would really help with some of the heavy commute
Originally Posted By Schmitty Good Vibes >>>I really think the best system would had been to just add a middle center overhead monorail route over every freeway. <<< Believe it or not, we're working on that. It just comes down to taxes and money. << The two aren't quite the same. People need to be realistic about the services they want, and what they'd be willing to pay for them. Another big problem I see is that people pay billions of tax dollars for one thing (i.e. transportation - that's your gas tax) and the legislature siphons those funds off to some other "pork" project. Mass transit in L.A. and Orange Counties could be done, despite the spread. But are the people up in Susanville wiling to be taxed for it? I live in Sacramento, and I love our light rail and bus systems (I just don't happen to love most of the people I'm riding with).
Originally Posted By jonvn You can't simply put a middle monorail beam over the center of every freeway. There are many reasons for this. It is not a workable solution.
Originally Posted By Schmitty Good Vibes You're right jonvn. But Caltrans is looking at every way we can improve transportation, and beamways is one consideration. I really don't see it happening, as beamways are about the most expensive option out there. Sadly, right now, with the money we've got, we are just looking to maintain infrastructure. There will be a lot of widenings, etc., but the vision is to improve mass transit throughout the State. It's really only a question of money.
Originally Posted By jonvn OK, for monorails. Suppose you are on a monorail, and the thing gets stuck out there on the 101 between Reseda and White Oak. How do you get the people off? What if there is a fire? You can't just build a beamway and that's it. You have to build area along side it that allows for people to evacuate a train that is in trouble. Since you need to do that, then you need to ask, why make a monorail at all then? It is not standard with regular rail lines, or other transit systems, so you can't use monorail vehicles on other tracks. So, what's the point? There are other issues with monorail in particular, too. So that won't happen.
