News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6K     0 

Hipster Duck said:
Los Angeles is far from ideal when it comes to transit expansion, but, by North American standards, they are doing impressive things. Foremost, the idiotic debate about what transit technology to use - which plagues Toronto and also plagues this discussion forum - is not something Angeleno transit planners waste their time with. LACMTA has utilized all transit modes wherever the demand warrants it:

- Express Buses with Premium Marketing (eg. Metro Rapid routes)
- True BRT (eg. Orange Line)
- Light Rail in the road median for medium-distance routes (eg. eastern leg of Gold Line, Expo line)
- Light Rail in grade separated ROW. or along rail corridor for long-distance routes (eg. Blue line, Green Line, northern extension of Gold line to Pasadena)
- Heavy Rail subway (along Wilshire corridor - LA's Yonge street - eventually expanding to Century City)

It also should be noted that LA Metro are better marketers. For example, they have the "15 minute service map", which may seem funny to Torontonians used to 5 minute service, but is a big deal in a city like LA, and it benefits from being separately mapped and identified. Their Metro Rapid bus is also separately marketed, like Viva or Zum.

---

One thing I've noticed lately is that the transit agencies making the biggest strides to improve service and expand rapid transit are located in Western Canada and the United States. When people talk about innovative transit operators in books and conferences, they usually cite Portland, Vancouver, Calgary, Denver, Salt Lake City, etc. The traditional transit cities of Eastern Canada and the US Northeast are mired in incompetence, labour problems, organizational inertia, political interference and cost overruns.
Click to expand...

The Mafia mentality has been crippling the great lakes since the end of the crack epidemic. It only got exposed by the the recent recession. Toronto has an inept mayor, everyone is killing each other in Chicago, and Detroit is about to go bankrupt. Let's not even get started with Montreal. Is it any wonder people will choose NY, LA, Vancouver (yea I said it)?
 
154,500 out of 3.7 million in LA proper and 17 million in the LA area? This is pathetically low ridership. Like every other US light rail system only a few percent use it to get to work, while the vast majority drive.

Los Angeles needs many more lines and a huge amount of money for expansion because Los Angeles traffic is horrible. These lines need to be grade separated whenever possible to increase capacity, using the rail and highway corridors where available to keep cost down.

Both Toronto and Los Angeles are ultimately going to find out the hard way that non grade separated LRT doesn't have enough capacity in the long term for many of the busier corridors, and will be forced to waste money grade separating LRT lines and/or building parallel lines to reduce overcrowding.
 
andrewpmk said:
154,500 out of 3.7 million in LA proper and 17 million in the LA area? This is pathetically low ridership. Like every other US light rail system only a few percent use it to get to work, while the vast majority drive.
Click to expand...

It's the American way except for New York which is both an american anomoly and very low ridership on the world stage as a %age of population using transit.

The preferred mode of travel seems to be the cab in that city.
 
andrewpmk said:
154,500 out of 3.7 million in LA proper and 17 million in the LA area? This is pathetically low ridership. Like every other US light rail system only a few percent use it to get to work, while the vast majority drive.

Los Angeles needs many more lines and a huge amount of money for expansion because Los Angeles traffic is horrible. These lines need to be grade separated whenever possible to increase capacity, using the rail and highway corridors where available to keep cost down.

Both Toronto and Los Angeles are ultimately going to find out the hard way that non grade separated LRT doesn't have enough capacity in the long term for many of the busier corridors, and will be forced to waste money grade separating LRT lines and/or building parallel lines to reduce overcrowding.
Click to expand...
LA is building subways too.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
The Mafia mentality has been crippling the great lakes since the end of the crack epidemic. It only got exposed by the the recent recession. Toronto has an inept mayor, everyone is killing each other in Chicago, and Detroit is about to go bankrupt. Let's not even get started with Montreal. Is it any wonder people will choose NY, LA, Vancouver (yea I said it)?
Click to expand...

Wait...what? LA has some of the most severe economic problems of any American metro area.
 
I'm sorry but I'm going to half to call Lorinc on what is clearly a political jab. Lorinc doesn't like Ford. Ok we get it, I don't like
Ford either. But the facts he is presenting don't exactly justify his thesis. I like how LA seems to have some kind of regional cooperation and dedicated funding strategy in place. I like how they are going ahead with all kinds of transit expansion options. Beyond that if you look at the time frame, population size, and overall budget it isn't at all impressive relative to the "disfunctional" amount of mass transit expansion we are embarking on here in Toronto.
 
This is a stupid article. LA is a sprawly type metro area that does not have the density of Toronto. SO what if LA has built LRT? It can work for them, but our densities are different and we need subways.

The Grope and Flail is looking for any way possible to attack Rob Ford's subway desire. Trying to boost LRT at all costs.

The other lefty paper in Toronto even pointed to LRT in Zurich. CAN YOU IMAGINE?? Zurich! Puny lil Swiss town with a quarter of our metro population.

The radical left was never known for its logic or brains.
 
raquel said:
This is a stupid article. LA is a sprawly type metro area that does not have the density of Toronto. SO what if LA has built LRT? It can work for them, but our densities are different and we need subways.

The Grope and Flail is looking for any way possible to attack Rob Ford's subway desire. Trying to boost LRT at all costs.

The other lefty paper in Toronto even pointed to LRT in Zurich. CAN YOU IMAGINE?? Zurich! Puny lil Swiss town with a quarter of our metro population.

The radical left was never known for its logic or brains.
Click to expand...

Raquel,

Toronto does not have the density of NYC and wont for some time. Building money losing subways is not a good idea. LA is also building subways, in their densest corridor, where they will make money. Why aren't you supporting a Downtown Relief Line, as that is what LA is doing. Yonge and Bloor were streetcars, and converted when demand required it. That will not happen on Sheppardfor a long time.
 
Referring to the Globe and Mail as a "lefty paper" associated with the "radical left"? lol...priceless. I have a feeling raquel is going to entertain us with a few days of trolling before getting the boot.

Anyway, despite its reputation for sprawl, LA is surprisingly dense. The urban area has a population density of 2729/sq km, compared to 2931 for Toronto (StatsCan population centre). Both have relatively dense suburbs, which make them the most densely populated urban areas in their respective countries. Toronto has a more highly developed core though.
 
Last edited:
MisterF said:
Referring to the Globe and Mail as a "lefty paper" associated with the "radical left"? lol...priceless. I have a feeling raquel is going to entertain us with a few days of trolling before getting the boot.

.
Click to expand...



If I get the boot, that would prove this to be an ideologically biased forum which cannot tolerate any contrary opinions. I have no interest in being part of a mutual back scratching club where everyone nods and agrees with each other, and are afraid to debate contrary positions.


If this forum is only for those who hate Ford, then label it as such.
 
raquel said:
If I get the boot, that would prove this to be an ideologically biased forum which cannot tolerate any contrary opinions. I have no interest in being part of a mutual back scratching club where everyone nods and agrees with each other, and are afraid to debate contrary positions.


If this forum is only for those who hate Ford, then label it as such.
Click to expand...
There are many center right members of this forum. I am one of them. You would get the boot for other things. They're in the site rules And I hope that does not happen.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
There are many center right members of this forum. I am one of them. You would get the boot for other things. They're in the site rules And I hope that does not happen.
Click to expand...

What rules? If I feel Globe and Mail is biased and left wing, I cannot say so? Ridiculous! Rules say I cannot attack another forum member personally, it does not say I cannot label a biased newspaper as biased.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top