Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Connecting it to the airport will definately encourage ridership. >> Connecting it with the communities where people who work in LV actually live might help, too. Of course, I'm sure the developers of this system wouldn't want to have the common folk mingling with the tourists.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Most monorail components are pre-fabricated " So are birail systems. I mean, that's one of the points of using a standard gauge system for your transit, you can get things off the shelf. It's less expensive, predesigned, and already fully understood. "There isn't a functioning mass transit system in the U.S. that doesn't require government subsidy of some sort." But that does not mean you go out and buy something that is more costly and less flexible than it needs to be.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Maybe my buddy, Jon, will come and we can sit and discuss online Disney webmasters over some sinful desserts." I don't really eat there, or cheesecake in general. We'll have to go someplace that won't gross me out or make me fat.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << But that does not mean you go out and buy something that is more costly and less flexible than it needs to be >> Who's to say highways aren't more costly and less flexible than they need to be?
Originally Posted By jonvn What has monorail have to do with highways? Be that as it may, highways are actually far more flexible than any fixed rail system, because they are literally everywhere. Bus lines are far more flexible than any rail system, and far less costly. They are also less utilized as they often take more time and have a rather low reputation. Be that as it may, you are simply not going to have any sort of reasonably usable fixed rail transit in LA. Again, say I want to travel to Pomona from Anaheim. Or maybe I want to go to Huntington Beach from Culver City. Or perhaps Sylmar to Vernon. You can't put trains everywhere.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << You can't put trains everywhere. >> You don't necessarily need to.
Originally Posted By jonvn In LA, you'd have to. Or run busses, which is what is done now, and that's not adequate, either. Kind of a bad problem that's developed.
Originally Posted By dshyates In a metropolitan area like LA one single type of mass transit will never work. It has to be a combination of buses and some sort of rail in a hub and spoke pattern. Buses alone won't work and rail can't be everywhere. Take the bus to the metro stop, or if you live outside the transit web you drive to the park and ride. Its not rocket science. This problem has nothing to do with resort transportation system. Disney is not a municipality and have the luxury of building something cool even if its expensive. Saying Disney can't afford to put in a resort monorail for actual transportation purposes but they can build one just as big as an attraction for Tomorrowland? But I still am sticking with the concept that for AGW a PM will be used. The Monorail will go to the 3rd gate, with maybe a stop at the west-end of AGW.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf "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)." I live in Sacramento as well and I find the light rail system to be useless. Unless you live and work within walking distance of a station it is pointless. That is why the main ridership consists of street-dwellers (they are always close to where they work and sleep). I'd rather use tax dollars for something else.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << I'd rather use tax dollars for something else. >> Don't worry, I'm sure your municipality is dumping tons of your tax dollars into suburban sprawl development schemes that cannot be sustained or maintained for the long term. But at least all those suburban dwellers will be well insulated from having to mingle with all of those street-dwellers you describe -- wouldn't it be awful if there was a mass transit network that actually gave them potential access to cul-de-sac crowd?
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf "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." LA is vastly different than Paris and Tokyo. When it's more cost-effective and time-effective to use public tranportation, people will use it (or demand it to be built). It is still a heck of a lot easier to drive around LA (and chepaer) than to take public transportation. That is not the case in Paris and Tokyo. I've lived in Europe and I loved the public transportation there. But LA is not Europe.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf "wouldn't it be awful if there was a mass transit network that actually gave them potential access to cul-de-sac crowd?" yes
Originally Posted By jonvn "Unless you live and work within walking distance of a station it is pointless." That's generally what happens in a sprawl type environment. You need very dense housing to make it worthwhile, it exists in SF.
Originally Posted By bean like someone mentioned, in order for a transportation system to work in needs to be a combination of diferent types of transportation. I am not sure how many are familiar with the metrolink rail system in southern California but as a rider i could say that all trains run extremely full. There are basically three main hubs. La union station Riverside train station and an orange county hub ststaion. all lines running east to west end up in La union station and riverside station. All lines running north to south at one point run thru La union station. Then you have lines that connect union station, orange county and the Inland empire. In these thre main hubs there are multiple options for transportation which include buses, light rail,subways, shuttles and other connections to train lines. All transfers are included in the same ticket. where the problem happens is the lack of individual city planning. There are certain cities which have actually combined their bus depots with the metrolink stations creating a perfect transportation hub that takes people thruought the cities boundaries and beyond. There are other cities which still have no clue on what to do and have no bus, shuttle or any means of transportation to allow people to continue their trip. The station in my city actually offers free shuttle services as well as bus services that run several dozen bus lines thruought the area and beyond. The county of Riverside is actually in the process of expanding the rail service that will add an extra 30 miles on existing rail tracks to help accomodate demand. Meanwhile the county offers free bus and shuttle service to many of the major cities and bus stations in the county. They have even taken the extra step of providing incentives for ridership like commuter discount programs in dozens of retail and food establishments as well as free internet access in most bus services to alow people to continue their daily work while commuting. so excuses being used that certain transportations will not or do nto work or just that EXCUSES. a well planned system that takes advantage of the various sources available would definately work in an area as vast as southern California. Instead the solution is alays to keep adding more useless carpool lanes that run empty many hours of the day and expensive toll roads which are rarely used.
Originally Posted By jonvn "so excuses being used that certain transportations will not or do nto work or just that EXCUSES." You have to figure cost per rider. It's not excuses, these are very real problems with transit in an area like LA, and it's a complicated issue. People bemoan the loss of the Pacific Electric, but the fact is that it went out of business because people stopped riding it. Sure, it went everywhere, but it was slower than going by car, and it failed. Sure those metrolink trains may be full, but it's because they are going to some densely packed areas. You also have to figure just how many people are or even can ride such a thing as a percent of how many people are on the roads. Lots of math and money involved.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 "Maybe my buddy, Jon, will come and we can sit and discuss online Disney webmasters over some sinful desserts." <<I don't really eat there, or cheesecake in general. We'll have to go someplace that won't gross me out or make me fat.>> Hmm ... that eliminates most places ... in the USA. You could always get a small salad sans dressing while I have a great Cheesecake Factory dessert. You know I'd really like to drop these 25 extra pounds, but since I'm pre-programmed to be fat because of something in my genes, I might as well just enjoy! ;-)
Originally Posted By jonvn "You could always get a small salad sans dressing while I have a great Cheesecake Factory dessert." I really don't like to eat there. The wait is far too long for what you get. I don't eat huge portions, don't really eat cheesecake and don't like to wait more than a couple minutes for a table. Rules out Cheesecake Factory. "since I'm pre-programmed to be fat because of something in my genes, I might as well just enjoy!" Might as well. Actually what I think would be the best thing for you is to try not to gain any more weight if you can. Those 25 pounds are going to be with you to your grave. Probably more.
Originally Posted By juicer The lettuce wraps at Cheescake Factory are delicious and not that fattening - There are quite a few low calorie items on the menu - When I go to a Cheesecake Factory - I try to go early in the evening - the wait is not bad at all
Originally Posted By jonvn "The lettuce wraps at Cheescake Factory are delicious and not that fattening " I'm sure they're great. I won't wait for one.
