Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The problem is traffic is terrible in LA and is not going to get any better, ever. That fact alone is enough to get people out of their cars, and it shows in the ridership by mile of LA's existing transit and the fact that people voluntarily taxed themselves to expand the transit system (which required a 67% supermajority).
They extended MARTA in Atlanta and people still drive. There's little point in taking public transit if there's free or cheap parking. Nearly all public transit riders are "captive" either in the sense that they can't afford a car or they can't afford a limo and driver (or daily cab fare) to drop them off at their Midtown office. Do you think most people would take a train in New York if they had door-to-door car service (which is actually common among NYC law and banking firms for late night commutes).
They extended MARTA in Atlanta and people still drive. There's little point in taking public transit if there's free or cheap parking. Nearly all public transit riders are "captive" either in the sense that they can't afford a car or they can't afford a limo and driver (or daily cab fare) to drop them off at their Midtown office.
I don't think this is true.
It also has nothing to do with with LA's crippling traffic being the main reason people will (and do, as evidenced just a few posts up) leave their cars at home. It also explains why LA has a pretty decent ridership per mile (though the Gold Line definitely dilutes it).
Prove it. Show me. Come on show me some visuals LOL. San Francisco the city is larger than DC in population, its twice as dense, and 50% less land area. Damn WOWOW! Should I be saying how we spank DC's arse to the back of the line? Ah now the metro argument, in 900 square miles the bay reaches a population of 6.5M and a uniform density that DC could only wish it had. WOW bend over, more spanking coming your way! It takes DC an urban area of 1,300 miles to even get half way through the 4M's. LOL
People brag about how huge L.A is but if you look at the city boundaries population and total area of the city, L.A isn't so big anymore. L.A without its suburbs is nothing.
Los Angeles official city limits incorporate most of the SFV and large portions of the Hollywood Hills, making it appear less dense than it is. If you took Central/South/East/and Southeast Los Angeles as defined here...Mapping L.A. - Los Angeles Times
...you would get a 264 sq mile contigous area surrounding DTLA with a population over 3 million. So no, L.A. isn't big just because it incorporates a large area of land. That's "big suburb" wishful thinking BS. Truth is, the Los Angeles Basin is roughly 500 sq miles with a population over 5 million. That leaves Chicago in the dust.
I highly recommend you keep your the arguments confined to the relatively small areas surrounding your CBDs when you want to argue the size and scope of your city vs. Los Angeles. Because if you start getting into population density over a larger scale, unless you live in NYC, you'll lose badly.
They extended MARTA in Atlanta and people still drive. There's little point in taking public transit if there's free or cheap parking. Nearly all public transit riders are "captive" either in the sense that they can't afford a car or they can't afford a limo and driver (or daily cab fare) to drop them off at their Midtown office. Do you think most people would take a train in New York if they had door-to-door car service (which is actually common among NYC law and banking firms for late night commutes).
Boy, you're really selling the transit lifestyle hard here.
They extended MARTA in Atlanta and people still drive. There's little point in taking public transit if there's free or cheap parking. Nearly all public transit riders are "captive" either in the sense that they can't afford a car or they can't afford a limo and driver (or daily cab fare) to drop them off at their Midtown office. Do you think most people would take a train in New York if they had door-to-door car service (which is actually common among NYC law and banking firms for late night commutes).
Plenty would (including a family member I know). Traffic is unpleasant and very slow during rush hour. Even if the speed was the same, many would rather sit on a commuter train and zone out after a hard's day work. My parents are scared of driving New York City; they're surprised I do.
Myself, the only time I drive in New York City is if there's a large speed difference. I enjoy not having to worry about the road, though the lack of convenient parking is an added plus. If I lived in Brooklyn, I would never want to drive to Union Square just to save a few minutes. Plus, if I walk around I can find another subway stop. With a car, I have to walk back to it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
