4 ms·
LA is just huge. It'll take a long time to wire it with rail.
by api 10y ago
LA is just huge. It'll take a long time to wire it with rail.
- wwweston 10y agoWould have taken less time if we hadn't torn out what was already built.
- ikawe 10y agoAnd in some cases it really doesn't make that much sense. I think there is definitely some urban vanity at play with the huge investment in train spending. Would personally love to see more bus rapid transit lines. Here's a peak at what Metro might be up to the next 40 years: http://la.curbed.com/2016/3/18/11265444/metro-los-angeles-ballot-measure-future-map http://la.curbed.com/2016/3/18/11265444/metro-los-angeles-ba...
- electricEmu 10y agoCommuter from Seattle here. BRT is an improvement here (I'm on it now) but vastly inferior to rail. Downtown to UW is 10 minutes on rail. My similar distanced BRT commute is 25-60 minutes. Grade separated rail makes a gigantic difference and moves leagues more humans faster than BRT could dream of. Unless BRT gets dedicated lanes it's no better than any other bus, except it stops is fewer places more often.
- ZeroGravitas 10y agoI thought, and wikipedia agrees, that BRT implies dedicated lanes, for at least the majority of the route. There's lots of little improvements that could be made to bus transport, for similar money to trains, I think a big part of it is just wanting to be responsible for big construction, whether to get kickbacks or to just a more straightforward ego boost.
- zachrose 10y agoTo wire it _back_ with rail, you mean. What is now the Expo line from Downtown to Santa Monica was, in 1875, the Los Angeles and Independence Railroad. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_and_Independence_Railroad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_and_Independence_R...