As someone who lived in West LA for years and saw the new line come in, I'll stop you right there. Cities like LA, Mexico-City, San Jose, etc. are not well designed and trying to re-invent them is going to take one hell of an earthquake.
I used to live at 16th and Santa Monica and was really excited about the Expo Line. I ended up moving before it showed up because it was many years late (I'm glad it finally got built though!)
I used to ride a recumbent to UCLA now and then because I had a death wish, and it shocked me that it took 25 minutes and yet people spent 60 minutes in traffic in their cars every day just to get across the 405.
You're right, though, those cities are mostly lost causes, more for the attitudes present in them than the infrastructure. Doesn't mean we can't try to make any new ones better though.
Oh man, the Expo line isn't synced with the lights, it's horrible. That and the bums like to go crazy and sit on the rail lines, causing jams at the street crossings. It's not that frequent, but it happens. It used to back up to Bundy on a bad day, now it's every day.
Riding a recumbent to UCLA from 16th is hardcore. Everyone I knew that rode in west LA got hit at least once, if not more.
Just ease the regulations on building height and density, and multi-story multi-family buildings will start to appear in good locations through free market capitalism.
My brother lived off Geary for a few years and went to a few public meetings on the proposed subway line they want to put under it. He was interested in the idea, as the N-Judah is a methadone clinic (last he was there a few years ago, caveats apply). He never saw such NIMYism and such tight resistance by the property owners on Geary to any improvements whatsoever.
You don't just ease regulations or really do anything 'big' in any city. Palms must be greased, and if you do not it is a horrific process that takes at least a decade.
I'm not saying that you are wrong about the free market. However, my brother thought that the most fantastic thing about the new Star Trek movies (esp. the new Wrath of Khan) was not the warp-drive, nor the aliens, but the very tall building in SF. Even in 400 years, there is no way the planning boards would allow such things.
The San Francisco Board is subordinate to the laws of the state of California. If California wants to ease regulations against denser urban areas, California can do it.
I mean, you aren't wrong, but you are unrealistic. Something like that will take years just to get to a final vote, and then the lawsuits will tie up the issues for at least 20 years. Say 30 years total, just to get to the point of a permit to build. To get things moving faster, you may need to re-write the CA constitution.
The billions being spent on self-driving cars cost less than the hundreds of billions it would take to convert the USA's cities to be even remotely well-designed.
Except after the billions on self driving cars you still have horribly designed cities.
If there is anything to be nostalgic about the past over, its how civil engineering projects of such scale were a lot more feasible when the complexity of doing them was so much lower.
Yeah, but converting all of our cities to 'well-designed' cities is not really an option at this point. Not only that, but millions and millions of people live in places that aren't cities.
Not even that. Nothing is stopping a small fleet of autonomous miniature vehicles from breaking off from the rail line, carrying people home, and returning. Lower speeds, lower mass, fewer deaths. We're only bound to the legacy car size by accommodating existing cars.
Feet work well in cooperative climates. They do not always work ‘well’ in Boston, Seattle, New York, Chicago, Detroit, etc. Consider not just basic walking, but carrying groceries, children or other items.
I invite anyone who buys into this sweeping generalization to walk a half mile in Las Vegas, NV; Tempe, AZ; Houston, TX; New Orleans, LA; or Tampa, FL in July or August.
Many cities in Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal see temperatures just as hot as Houston or Las Vegas. Yet public transport is just as common as in the rest of Europe.
Walking half a mile in 35 C (95 F) isn't an actual problem unless you have a medical condition or you are morbidly obese. For those very rare 40+ C (105+ F) days, throw an official midday siesta, or just shut everything down like for snow days.
>Walking half a mile in 35 C (95 F) isn't an actual problem unless you have a medical condition or you are morbidly obese.
Again with the hand waving as if this was a solved problem. Trust me - if you actually try to walk half a mile on a 90+ degree, high humidity day you will regret it. The issue isn't just infirmity - i.e. those prone to heat stroke or overweight, but one of comfort. If you actually try tooling around in Houston (for example) you'll end up soaked in sweat. It'll be worse if you're dressed for the office in long sleeves and slacks.
That's when you'll discover that more than the public need to adapt to public transportation uber alles. Can I use a shopping trolley for groceries? Sure. Can I cycle to work? No doubt. But what if your employer doesn't have showers available? Mine doesn't. I can't show up drenched in sweat looking like a wet rat and stinking all day of sweat. And that's exactly what'll happen if I ride the few miles I have to work. Even if I take a change of clothes to work I still have no place to shower and neither does anyone else unless they are health club members. There are many externalities you're just hand waving away. As someone who lives in this climate I assure you I'd love to see light rail everywhere but it just won't replace the last mile for people without drastic societal changes.
There's also the fact that bus and rail frequency needs to dramatically increase to entice riders and also accommodate them when they do come. Will people choose a 45 minute bus ride over a 15 minute drive? Particularly when on average you'll spend 7.5-10 minutes baking in the sun or lightly shaded by an un-airconditioned bus stop? Not unless forced to, no.
I'd love to see you deliver a dining room set, complete with a sofa, a love seat, an arm chair, a mattress with a frame, and an 85" TV using your feet.
Bit of a strawman, no? That's obviously a good use case for a van. But I never said we should completely eliminate all roads, did I? I just think the primacy of the automobile is worth questioning - moving people (and goods) is the goal, not moving cars.
I mean, I'd love to see you medevac a gravely wounded person from the middle of Arctic tundra to a hospital 120 miles away on your feet.. except I wouldn't, because we have helicopters for a reason. We don't assume you should have to use a helicopter to get groceries though.
