Comments on: Get LA Moving: A Rail movement

By: Alek F

Alek F — Sat, 26 May 2007 21:42:36 +0000

I applaud to Damian Goodman for his efforts, and I totally support him, as well as all other pro-rail folks.
Let’s use common sense: not a single mass transit system in the world (including Los Angeles) could exist without rail.
Buses in Los Angeles have proven to be inefficient, clumsy, slow, unreliable, and overall – unattractive to most riders. But building more rail lines (including Purple Line to Santa Monica) would give a great boost to our mass transit system.
For short distances buses may somewhat be better (though only somewhat!), but for moderated distances nothing can replace trains! – that’s for sure.
So, let’s hope for more Metro-Rail lines in Los Angeles!
Alek

By: Dee

Dee — Wed, 23 May 2007 20:14:42 +0000

I’ve always looked at bus and rail as car analogs. The Rail systems is similiar conceptually to freeways, whereas the Buses are similar to surface streets. Gotta have both.

MTA knows it, but I also wonder what someone’s been spiking the MTA Koolaid with — THEY need a 40% increase in revenue to stay afloat, but where are the RIDERS supposed to get 40% more income to cover it?

Public transit is crucial, all this wrangling is A VAST sink of energy.

By: Scott Mercer

Scott Mercer — Wed, 16 May 2007 06:25:19 +0000

There is no way the buses will ever be replaced by rail completely or removed completely.

Even when Los Angeles had 1500 miles of streetcars and interurban trains (approx. 1910-1940) there were still buses going to places that rail didn’t. Look it up.

But we do need to build way more rail. Right now we have about 72 miles in the Metrorail system. I’d be happy with double that. Damien Goodman’s map shows about a 400-500 mile system, roughly equivalent to the New York subway system. I’d be overjoyed with 150 miles…and first on the block should be a connection to LAX.

By: Kate

Kate — Sat, 12 May 2007 16:46:16 +0000

One size does not fit all, and one mode of transportation will not meet all the needs of those of us who want to use public transportation as much as we can. A mix of rail and bus will be much more productive than one or the other.

By: Tim Buchheim

Tim Buchheim — Sat, 12 May 2007 01:00:58 +0000

Given the size of Los Angeles and the surrounding area, we need to have a mixed bus/rail system.

Rail is much better for moving people long distances. Traveling 30 miles by bus is impractical in most cases.

Buses are better for short distances. While the Paris Metro can get you to within a few blocks of anything, there’s no way we can afford to build rail so densely in an area as big as LA. So buses are essential to getting people to/from rail stations.

Sure, we have some long distance buses. But they should be phased out over time as rail lines replace them. Rail is faster, cheaper, cleaner, and probably safer in the long run.