Anonymous has left a new comment on your post ""WHY" L.A. traffic sucks #3: Bus'em and clog'em":
So are you finally ready to be taxed for a comprehensive subway system?
Note:
Transit ridership is much higher than people seem to think. At 1.3 million (bus and rail) daily riders that ends up being roughly 10% of the county.
Posted by Anonymous to L.A. traffic sucks: Let's fix it! at 6/01/2006 03:38:54 AM
italianesco replies:
I think this question should be put to L.A. Country voters along with a few other questions. Some of the answers can be gleaned from this article in the L.A. Weekly:
The Subway Mayor - How a bus-only politician — and a car-obsessed city — are learning to love the underground By ERIC BERKOWITZ - Thursday, August 18, 2005 - 12:00 am
Here are some highlights from the article. All emphasis mine:
"Villaraigosa talked of a 'subway to the sea' during the campaign and staked a big chunk of his political capital on a promise to expand the rail system. [...] Villaraigosa took the first step by assuming the helm of the MTA. Now, the question is whether he will have the clout to move the political mountains required to get Los Angeles the transit system it deserves."
HOW LONG will it take?
“'This isn’t going to happen in four years,' the mayor said. 'We’ve got to start building a consensus around a plan for the next 20 years.'"
-----------------------
HOW MUCH will it cost?
"The Red Line’s extension to the Valley was completed in 2000. Jagged as a gerrymandered congressional district, and carrying a milelong spur from Vermont to Western, the $4.7 billion line is the most expensive 17 miles of subway ever built."
-------------------------------------------
WHO will pay for it?
"Riding the swell of frustration, Yaroslavsky sponsored an initiative in 1998 that barred the use of county sales-tax money for subway projects. He described it as the county’s 'last chance' to avoid 'a regional transportation nightmare.' With no opposition on the ballot, it passed. That same year, the MTA suspended all new rail projects." [...]
"Yaroslavsky stands by his 1998 prohibition against the use of county money for underground rail, and he still says subways are too costly. But he’s starting to sound like a cautious Red Line advocate." [...]
"Given that Sacramento has diverted more than $2 billion of local transit funding in the past two years to meet state budget shortfalls, and the Bush administration likely will continue to try to cut transportation funding, the subway will be a budget challenge even if Waxman and Yaroslavsky soften up." [...]
"Transit rider Harris, who has little money to spare, said he would “gladly accept a half-cent sales tax for the Red Line. I’d do it in a second.” That’s good, but it’s probably not representative of the electorate. People meekly give oil companies record profits by funding a 40 percent boost in gasoline prices, but they seize up when the word tax is involved. The voters will need to be convinced." [...]
"Villaraigosa can’t count on bundles of help from Washington or Sacramento. The region was reasonably successful in the recent federal transit bill [...], but money for a new subway project is a long shot even if Waxman comes around. Closer to home, our Hummer-driving governor won’t ever back such a project. The mayor will have to build local resolve to carry a substantial share of the load." [...]
--------------------------------------------
WILL it ever happen?
"Before one more foot of subway tunnel is in place, Villaraigosa and his new rail coalition must conquer the demons that have derailed L.A.’s most ambitious transit plans, even before the smattering of subway and light-rail lines were built." [...]
"Criollo is easily set off by talk of more subways. If Villaraigosa 'advocates for more rail, then we are willing to have open struggle with him in court, in the boardroom and in the streets. We’ll fight him every inch of the way.'”
"So far, the Red Line is nowhere to be found on the MTA’s schedule of priorities. After the Waxman and Yaroslavsky prohibitions, 'it’s not really on the radar screen,' said MTA spokesman Marc Littman. Villaraigosa said he intends to rectify this when the MTA prepares its new long-range plan in the coming months." [...]
"Villaraigosa’s challenge — and it’s a big one — is to communicate a vision that will inspire the city to endure the costs and disruptions of long-term transit projects."
---------------------------------------------
Not to sound pessimistic or to discourage anyone - I'm a believer in public transporation - but sounds to me like L.A. has waited a bit too long to tackle this immense problem. A comprehensive subway system for L.A. is a long, long, long-term project, and even if it were approved tomorrow, it'd be a long, long, long way from completion.
“'This isn’t going to happen in four years,' the mayor said. 'We’ve got to start building a consensus around a plan for the next 20 years.'"
On top of that, you can be sure that the traffic would be horrendous with the disruption caused by all the construction. Anybody pinning their hopes on a complete subway system for relief from the traffic problem is dreaming. I'd say that the city needs to do whatever it takes NOW - NOT tomorrow, NOT four years from now, NOT 20 years from now - to find simple, affordable and politically viable relief, immediate relief, to the traffic problem. Some of my ideas might be a good place to start... ;-) [See WESTSIDE SOLUTION AT A GLANCE]
------------------------------------------------
Read the complete article in the L.A. Weekly: The Subway Mayor - How a bus-only politician — and a car-obsessed city — are learning to love the underground By ERIC BERKOWITZ - Thursday, August 18, 2005. It's mostly a history of the roadblocks to the subway.
------------------------------------------------
Make it viral. Make it vital. Spread the word...
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Open Discussion: Subway: "...ready to be taxed for a comprehensive subway system?"
Monday, April 24, 2006
Do angelenos dream of electric "air surfing" and flying saucers?
Do angelenos dream of electric "air surfing" and flying saucers*, subways and monorails**?
An "angeleno" friend of mine, cynically jokes that angelenos "love unprotected lefts just like they love unprotected sex!" (hah-hah, very funny!)
It may be that angelenos like it this way. They like their messed-up traffic city as a leftover of the outlaw days of the wild, wild West. Maybe so. I have yet to meet a REAL born and raised "native angeleno", though. Most of the people in L.A. are not from there, anyway. They've come from somewhere and brought their wild ways with them and contribute to the mess instead helping to fix it. I can't believe real Californians want to give the world this impression of them as a group of people who can't get their stuff together. The world has this impression of California as a place on the cutting edge of science and technology (CalTech, Silicon Valley), entertainment (Hollywood), social issues (the 60's), the environment (Earth Day). It must come as quite a shock to them to come to a city whose traffic is only a little better than that of many overpopulated Third World cities.
During the height of the three-month-long MTA METRO mechanics strike in 2003, the city turned practically into a Third World city overnight. Traffic was horrifying and it was crippling the city and driving businesses out of business--not to mention fraying the nerves of a lot of people. Bands of Mexicans armed with vans drove up and down Wilshire Boulevard picking up anyone who'd flag them down for a couple of dollars as an army of "pirate taxis" rising to the ocassion and saving a lot of people who couldn't car pool with anyone or afford a daily commute by cab from losing their jobs. It gave the city a real Third World flavor. Wild, wild West, indeed.
Americans are used to instant gratification: a miracle pill that would allow them to eat all they want as much as they want whenever they want and keep them "slim fit". L.A. probably needs to take a very bitter pill to cure its chronic traffic artereosclerosis. But that's not what I'd like to concern myself with here. I'd like to focus on smaller, much smaller scale things that are "do-able" (like "good diet and exercise": get those "arteries" flowing!) without spending millions and without involving the politicians and the public in any major political struggle ("triple bypass surgery": a complete subway system). I'd like to make suggestions that, if followed, would speed up traffic ALMOST INSTANTLY and take ALMOST NOTHING to implement except a little determination to MAKE THINGS BETTER. People like my angeleno friend above can take their cynicism to the desert and leave it somewhere out there near Palm Springs...
One thing is for sure: electric "air surfing" and flying saucers (or subways and monorails, for that matter!) aren't coming to L.A. anytime soon. They might as well fix the traffic problem on the ground if they want to get from point A to point B on time without being consumed by apathy or road rage...
[* a reference to Philip K. Dick's book, "Do androids dream of electric sheep?" The movie "Blade Runner" was based on this book. A futuristic vision of L.A. in which some do have flying saucers to fly over it all]
[** see: Begging for L.A. monorail in Here in Van Nuys blog]
Make it viral. Make it vital...
