A Los Angeles Plan to Reshape the Streetscape Sets Off Fears of Gridlock

[JNorton]

BRT will not necessarily relieve congestion (not all transportation improvements must justify themselves be making life easier for motorists), but it WILL increase and speed up access for people using transit, thereby encouraging the use of public transportation.

And the irony remains, congestion does not create great cities, but great cities are inevitably congested. They are where people want to be. Whether you're sitting on a crowded freeway or crowded subway, that's inevitably part of the deal of living in a major, (hate the term) world-class city. Which, like it or not, Los Angeles is. The freeways and boulevards (in their current configurations) have done all they can for us; other approaches are now required. And if closing off a few lanes of a few streets is too much to bear--what other plans would any of the nay-sayers suggest (other than more of the same)?

[Rothman]

BRT will not necessarily relieve congestion (not all transportation improvements must justify themselves be making life easier for motorists), but it WILL increase and speed up access for people using transit, thereby encouraging the use of public transportation.

And the irony remains, congestion does not create great cities, but great cities are inevitably congested. They are where people want to be. Whether you're sitting on a crowded freeway or crowded subway, that's inevitably part of the deal of living in a major, (hate the term) world-class city. Which, like it or not, Los Angeles is. The freeways and boulevards (in their current configurations) have done all they can for us; other approaches are now required. And if closing off a few lanes of a few streets is too much to bear--what other plans would any of the nay-sayers suggest (other than more of the same)?

Well, then your argument is becoming a little muddled.  You were saying that clogged freeways puts traffic on residential streets.  The freeways are already clogged. 

You say that BRT will not alleviate congestion, which means that the freeways remain clogged and that traffic going on residential streets is going to stay there.

If there's room for another lane, just make it general purpose.  At least there will be some congestion relief.

[Buffaboy]

Regarding the nay-sayers: some people just can't imagine a city--or world--different from the one they currently occupy. For cities to become more livable, sustainable and civilized, changes that are necessary, e.g., road "diets" or special bus lanes, may cause short-term disruption, but the long-term value is what matters (and this opinion is not from some upstart urban hipster but from a 76-year-old suburbanite).

I see blind adherence to these principles very damaging in the short and long terms.  Having taken every one of my graduate electives in regional planning, it is astonishing to me how unfriendly policy proposals for sustainability are for families.  Imagine trying to buy and carry enough food for a family of four on public transit.  Imagine trying to run kids around for their extracurricular activities (including on weekends) on transit.  That's not anything but creating a nightmare.

Here in Albany, my wife and I took advantage of public transit.  We live near the "new" BusPlus line.  CDTA calls the 905 line BRT because it stops at few stops than the former local lines between Albany and Schenectady.  So, because the monthly pass was indeed cheaper than driving a car back and forth between our home and downtown Albany and paying for parking, my wife took the bus.

The cost benefit was the only benefit.  The added prices were:

• An hour-long commute when the drive would be 30 minutes.
• Sitting next to the untouchables on the bus, including those that smelled like urine and other bodily fluids
• Being unable to do much of anything off the bus line, or even on it.  The time to travel on it was simply too great if you had to stop, run errands, and then get back on.
• Grocery shopping was out of the question
• Any need to transport our children around was left up to me, since I had a car

We made do, but our car was definitely necessary.

That said, my wife just got a much better job that is essentially off the bus line with free parking.  Sure, theoretically she could still take the bus and transfer lines, thus extending her commute to about 90 minutes or more and making it far too unpredictable to be feasible, but she doesn't look back at her commuting-by-bus days very happily.  Great money-saver when it's really convenient (i.e. living and working right next to the line), but any slight change in location causes cars to win the cost-benefit argument.

I'm not against public transit, but when people start talking about it as a substitute for car travel rather than a complement to it (as it actually operates over the long term), it makes me reach for my revolver.

I don't know about revolver lol, but what you said was spot on. In Buffalo, many of the road diets are warranted, and you probably know much more about them than me. The city has lost a considerable amount of people over the past 50 years and as far as I know, they aren't returning. Utica is the same way, it's small, has a stagnant population and an improving bus line that runs primarily between places of interest and schools so you can do light shopping or errand running without taking the car. The problem is that it's not as frequent as can be, and all of the other issues you mention.

The real issue with road diets and a transition to public-primary transportation is the lack of effective transport for things like groceries, FOOD in general between city-to-city, and the lack of privacy. I'd have to imagine it takes hours to get from one end of LA to another. Though I haven't even read OP's post yet, can you imagine what could happen if they cut back on the Interstates and other highways running through dense areas? I'm sure I'm missing something here that would be another consequence of such boneheaded actions.

Oh and did I mention the lack of privacy? I do more private things in my car than I would want to do in public transportation. I can go to drive thrus, drive ins, pull-up-and-load-ups, etc. Among other things I do in the car. Why would I want to trade it all away?

[DJStephens]

There has been some "road diets" implemented in las Cruces, New Mexico.  In some cases they were applied on excess capacity N-S routes and made sense.  In other cases they were applied to an E-W route, or a heavily trafficked N-S route, and created a congested mess.  Most surface streets and arterials are historically north - south in nature, following the Rio Grande river valley.  There was never completion of an adequate east - west infrastructure in most of the city, and much of the valley.   Dog legs and jogs abound.   Some "reconstructions" - see north Valley Drive (former US 85) were built to a regressive nature, with inadequate geometrics, lack of a center turn lane for the entire length, and a failure to straighten and align route, mainly on the west side.   Subtract the added sidewalks, and Bus turnouts, and the project was a fail.   Inconsistentcy of design standards are clearly evident, with center turn lanes added in some places, but not in others where the need clearly exists.