tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5020450922071681506.post4838373021724635662..comments2023-04-05T02:09:24.810-07:00Comments on Street Heat: Price Speaks on the Failure of LA's BoulevardsDamien Newtonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00675336302224403432noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5020450922071681506.post-70964278722029829232008-02-15T18:45:00.000-08:002008-02-15T18:45:00.000-08:00Joe Linton from Livable Places, here - we're the g...Joe Linton from Livable Places, here - we're the group that hosted Mr. Price's talk, so you may dismiss my point of view as biased boosterism. Actually, Price didn't suggest too much in the way of carpooling - but suggests that the most resilient system is one that isn't too dependent on a single mode. The viable choices that people have are: car, car-share, taxi, transit, bike or walk.<BR/><BR/>He stated that Vancouver's density works mostly due to the viability of walking! Their downtown population doubled and they actually saw a decrease in car trips, with a very small increase in transit... turns out folks were walking instead of driving, and even instead of transit. So, if Vancouver's experience can inform us (and I think it can), land use and urban design might be more important than grade-separated rail or carpooling.<BR/><BR/>He definitely made distinctions between Vancouver and L.A. (no freeways there, their region's population is an order of magnitude smaller than ours), but he made parallels between Los Angeles and Vancouver. We both have the populous downtowns and boulevards that came of age in the "street car city" which can support effective density.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5020450922071681506.post-17283217014069463902008-02-12T16:53:00.000-08:002008-02-12T16:53:00.000-08:00It begins with grade separated rail. Good points m...It begins with grade separated rail. <BR/><BR/>Good points made, I'll only point out that Vancouver is nothing like Los Angeles. Los Angeles is more analogous to metro areas like Greater London with Tokyo like polycentrism. That polycentrism is why our challenge is so unique.<BR/><BR/>Taking cars of the road is highly dependent on providing alternatives to regional transportation (Long Beach to LAX, Warner Center to Pasadena, etc.). With the increase in housing cost - pushing more workers away from the economic centers, this problem is exacerbating. Used to be a single-mom secretary working in Downtown could afford a house/apartment in a decent neighborhood in South LA. Now such places go for $1500 a month or cost $500K. So people move out to Paramount and the SFV.<BR/><BR/>Sort of coming back to my central point: increasing residential or office density in a location will ALWAYS be opposed by locals, and the crux of their objections are justifiable, in my opinion. We have great examples with the Grove.<BR/><BR/>Build the rapid transit network first (and to be "rapid" it has to be moving FAST) and then the parking requirement reductions, density bonuses all begin to make sense - because there will be actual modal shifts and alternatives to single occupancy vehicles. And yes it has to be a NETWORK, otherwise the regional trips off the corridor aren't addressed. Another great example is what Hollywood/Highland, which sits on top of one of the most used subway lines in the country, has done to traffic in it's surrounding area.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5020450922071681506.post-50535773773615021682008-02-12T13:23:00.000-08:002008-02-12T13:23:00.000-08:00Thanks for your posts Icey.To be fair to Mr. Price...Thanks for your posts Icey.<BR/><BR/>To be fair to Mr. Price, he is a guest in our city from Vancouver, Canada. He did talk somewhat about funding, but really that part of the equation is up to us as Angelenos. <BR/><BR/>You're not going to get an argument from me about transportation funding and the need to commit more resources and taxes...it's something I've written a lot about, and in a past was "the guy that advocates for a gas tax" back in New Jersey.Damien Newtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00675336302224403432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5020450922071681506.post-46415340031286142042008-02-12T13:16:00.000-08:002008-02-12T13:16:00.000-08:00What I wanted to say before inadvertently posting ...What I wanted to say before inadvertently posting the previous comment was that LA County is the 17th largest economy in the world and CA is the 7th largest economy in the world and that we have the resources to transform the transportation system of the entire state independent of a federal gov't that is bogged down with delusions of perpetuating a crumbling empire. <BR/><BR/>I find it ludicrous that Los Angelenos complain about traffic, high gas prices, or even appear concerned about global warming(California is the 12th largest emitter of greenhouse gases worldwide, 41% of which come from cars). Los Angeles has 1/10 of the mass transit of Paris? Maybe 1/15? Maybe 1/20?<BR/><BR/>As Americans we consume 25% of the world's oil, if people such as Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton were more honest they would acknowledge the necessity for reducing car ownership rates in order to create the energy independence they often mention. But then, they wouldn't be electable would they?<BR/><BR/>And that is the realization Los Angelenos and Californians have to make: that we can't afford the car as the primary mode of transportation anymore. Talking about mass transit without suggesting how to fund it gives me the impression that the writer or speaker lacks imagination or courage(such as Antonio Villaraigosa). <BR/><BR/>Taxes are good. Especially if they are imposed on gasoline and used to fund mass transit.IceyPanchohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471686283426498694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5020450922071681506.post-72369648483913529102008-02-12T12:50:00.000-08:002008-02-12T12:50:00.000-08:00Interesting article. Many people are writing about...Interesting article. Many people are writing about these issues now, but most fail to suggest the necessity for raising revenue, the most likely source being an increase in taxes of some kind.IceyPanchohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471686283426498694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5020450922071681506.post-37008706919241949522008-02-12T10:16:00.000-08:002008-02-12T10:16:00.000-08:00This goober doesn't understand the class issues wi...This goober doesn't understand the class issues with carpooling and bus ridership.<BR/><BR/>Our citizens have been fooled enough times by mass-transit madness, and they've had enough "encounters" with bums and gangsters that they've chosen to sit in their cars, bumper-to-bumper, at any price.<BR/><BR/>If the aforementioned advocate is unwilling to address the security and safety concerns that currently prevent those of means from "sharing" with the inner-city folk, it ain't gonna happen.<BR/><BR/>Note that there ARE examples where classes mix - the Santa Monica freeway bus, and to some extent, the Metro Rail lines, though these are showing signs of neglect.<BR/><BR/>If carpooling is to be effective, we need a biometric vetting ID system for anonymous passengers (think SLUG lines with authentication), HOT lanes, some form of "guaranteed ride home" program, and an end to the current public transit monopoly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com