3 ms·

The density of LA is still far too low for a NY style subway to be cost effective. Metro Rail is in some ways pseudo-inter-city-commuter-rail, similar to BART a

The density of LA is still far too low for a NY style subway to be cost effective. Metro Rail is in some ways pseudo-inter-city-commuter-rail, similar to BART and the DC "Metro". Its also interesting due to its diverse type of trackae (heavy and light rail).

rayiner 14y ago
The density of the LA metro area is slightly higher than that of the NYC metro area. The problem is vision: namely nobody has any. The folks who built NYC at the turn of the century had vision. They didn't just put in subway lines, they put in mostly four-track subway lines with room for express trains. They didn't just build commuter rail, they built a vast system (again with a lot of four-track to accommodate express trains) with stations in numerous little Westchester and Long Island town. Oh, and it was electrified in 1903 (kudos to Tesla, but all-electric commuting is very turn of the 20th century stuff). Over 100 years later, we're still using that infrastructure. Today, of the 1.6 million people that enter Manhattan every day for work, 80% ride either commuter rail or the subway. This is a movement of people that would absolutely crush any other city despite their extensive highway networks, but New York handles it very well using ancient infrastructure.
- jessriedel 14y ago
  FYI: all this visionary track was built largely by...wait for it...for-profit companies running competing tracks. The city socialized the subway in 1940. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_New_York_City_Subway#Unification_and_contraction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_New_York_City_Su...
joonix 14y ago
They just have to build it and they will come eventually. Things will get denser near rail stops. The traffic situation is just not sustainable in LA and it's kind of pathetic. It takes time and it takes subsidization. Two things US democracies don't play well with.

rayiner 14y ago

The density of the LA metro area is slightly higher than that of the NYC metro area. The problem is vision: namely nobody has any. The folks who built NYC at the turn of the century had vision. They didn't just put in subway lines, they put in mostly four-track subway lines with room for express trains. They didn't just build commuter rail, they built a vast system (again with a lot of four-track to accommodate express trains) with stations in numerous little Westchester and Long Island town. Oh, and it was electrified in 1903 (kudos to Tesla, but all-electric commuting is very turn of the 20th century stuff). Over 100 years later, we're still using that infrastructure. Today, of the 1.6 million people that enter Manhattan every day for work, 80% ride either commuter rail or the subway. This is a movement of people that would absolutely crush any other city despite their extensive highway networks, but New York handles it very well using ancient infrastructure.

jessriedel 14y ago
FYI: all this visionary track was built largely by...wait for it...for-profit companies running competing tracks. The city socialized the subway in 1940. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_New_York_City_Subway#Unification_and_contraction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_New_York_City_Su...

joonix 14y ago

They just have to build it and they will come eventually. Things will get denser near rail stops. The traffic situation is just not sustainable in LA and it's kind of pathetic. It takes time and it takes subsidization. Two things US democracies don't play well with.