4 ms·

Japan has no problems and look at a map of Tokyo. There are few straight streets in the entire city. It's also got plenty of hills. So does LA and they used to

Japan has no problems and look at a map of Tokyo. There are few straight streets in the entire city. It's also got plenty of hills. So does LA and they used to have an amazing transit system. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Electric_Railway http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Electric_Railway) So no, you don't need a flat grid to have great public transit.

seanmcdirmid 14y ago
Whoa, Tokyo is totally flat! No comparison, and also Japan cities spend a lot more money on infrastructure than even American cities do. Best to compare San Francisco with...Lausanne...or Chongqing (or any city with a bunch of hills that is fairly vertical).
- cousin_it 14y ago
  Doesn't Lausanne have pretty good public transport? Here's a live map: http://simcity.vasile.ch/lausanne/ http://simcity.vasile.ch/lausanne/
  - seanmcdirmid 14y ago
    About as nice as San Francisco, though I biked most everywhere in the latter (small city!) and only took Caltrain in the former.
  - bhickey 14y ago
    The Lausanne metro is fantastic. The M2 cuts straight through the hills and the M1 runs parallel to Lake Geneva and can get you to, say, EPFL in no time. On top of this there are the commuter trains which can get you to Geneva in about thirty minutes. How fast can you get from 4th & King to the SJC? Nevertheless, comparing San Francisco to Lausanne is unfair. Lausanne provides better infrastructure for a smaller population.
    - seanmcdirmid 14y ago
      They have similar topologies, that was my only point (and that I've lived in both cities to know...).
- greggman 14y ago
  I guess we have a different definition of flat since I hiked up and down Tokyo hills all the time. But even if it's not has hilly as SF it's streets are far more curvy.
- snogglethorpe 14y ago
  > Tokyo is totally flat Tokyo is in no way even close to flat. It has some flat areas (e.g. landfill in Tokyo bay), but there are huge numbers of very hilly areas as well (including many popular commercial hubs and densely populated areas in the city center). Not gentle hills in many cases either, but quite steep. [... and if you go to the outskirts, there are actual mountains within the Tokyo city limits!] One difference with with SF, of course, is that Tokyo roads don't form a rigid grid that ignores the topography.... > Japan cities spend a lot more money on infrastructure than even American cities Tokyo mass transit is overwhelmingly private (owned, run, and financed), especially if you're talking about rail.
hollerith 14y ago
LA is much flatter than SF. Although some live in the canyons and on the hills, most live on a single plain -- well, two plains if you count the San Fernando Valley as a separate plain.
- greggman 14y ago
  LA at large may be flat but hello, the Santa Monica Mountains run directly through it. The trains that used to go through LA went all through the hills. The tunnels are still in many of them. http://goo.gl/wBRSG http://goo.gl/wBRSG The Angel's Flight Train is still there. http://goo.gl/UMqCB http://goo.gl/UMqCB The worlds oldest Freeway, the 110 goes through a valley. The 5, 101, 10 and 60 wrap around all kinds of hills within a few miles of downtown LA.

seanmcdirmid 14y ago

Whoa, Tokyo is totally flat! No comparison, and also Japan cities spend a lot more money on infrastructure than even American cities do. Best to compare San Francisco with...Lausanne...or Chongqing (or any city with a bunch of hills that is fairly vertical).

cousin_it 14y ago
Doesn't Lausanne have pretty good public transport? Here's a live map: http://simcity.vasile.ch/lausanne/ http://simcity.vasile.ch/lausanne/
- seanmcdirmid 14y ago
  About as nice as San Francisco, though I biked most everywhere in the latter (small city!) and only took Caltrain in the former.
- bhickey 14y ago
  The Lausanne metro is fantastic. The M2 cuts straight through the hills and the M1 runs parallel to Lake Geneva and can get you to, say, EPFL in no time. On top of this there are the commuter trains which can get you to Geneva in about thirty minutes. How fast can you get from 4th & King to the SJC? Nevertheless, comparing San Francisco to Lausanne is unfair. Lausanne provides better infrastructure for a smaller population.
  - seanmcdirmid 14y ago
    They have similar topologies, that was my only point (and that I've lived in both cities to know...).
greggman 14y ago
I guess we have a different definition of flat since I hiked up and down Tokyo hills all the time. But even if it's not has hilly as SF it's streets are far more curvy.
snogglethorpe 14y ago
> Tokyo is totally flat Tokyo is in no way even close to flat. It has some flat areas (e.g. landfill in Tokyo bay), but there are huge numbers of very hilly areas as well (including many popular commercial hubs and densely populated areas in the city center). Not gentle hills in many cases either, but quite steep. [... and if you go to the outskirts, there are actual mountains within the Tokyo city limits!] One difference with with SF, of course, is that Tokyo roads don't form a rigid grid that ignores the topography.... > Japan cities spend a lot more money on infrastructure than even American cities Tokyo mass transit is overwhelmingly private (owned, run, and financed), especially if you're talking about rail.

hollerith 14y ago

LA is much flatter than SF. Although some live in the canyons and on the hills, most live on a single plain -- well, two plains if you count the San Fernando Valley as a separate plain.

greggman 14y ago
LA at large may be flat but hello, the Santa Monica Mountains run directly through it. The trains that used to go through LA went all through the hills. The tunnels are still in many of them. http://goo.gl/wBRSG http://goo.gl/wBRSG The Angel's Flight Train is still there. http://goo.gl/UMqCB http://goo.gl/UMqCB The worlds oldest Freeway, the 110 goes through a valley. The 5, 101, 10 and 60 wrap around all kinds of hills within a few miles of downtown LA.