Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket
Building more subways is a great step and I wish SF was doing more of the same. But the thing is, people in SF actually use public transit. In another thread that was posted in City Discussions, only 4.7% of workers in the LA MSA use public transportation for 2019. That is abysmal! In the city of LA, only 8.75% of workers use public transit. That's less than most suburbs in the Bay Area.
|
Angelenos will ride public transit if rail is built where the people actually want/need to go. For instance, the Crenshaw Line northern extension (which has partial funding and political momentum) from Expo/Crenshaw to Hollywood/Highland (and potentially the Hollywood Bowl) is projected to average 9,089-14,029 riders per mile, depending on which of the three routes is chosen. The La Brea alternative, with a projected ridership density of 14,029 per mile, is higher than every US rapid transit system outside of NYC Subway and PATH.
The people of Los Angeles will still love and drive their cars, but car ownership is also common in all of the transit-oriented cities in North America, including NYC. The key for LA is getting Angelenos to use transit for long-distance commutes instead of fossil fuel-emitting automobiles. Other than that, there wouldn't be much of a difference between LA and the Bay Area, Chicago, DC, Philly, Boston, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver.