RSS
May 1, 2007
Traffic Freakout: Dedicated Bus Lanes on Wilshire
Wilshire is the most congested artery in the nation, right? So putting dedicated bus lanes during rush hour until the subway is built would make it worse for the cars, right?
Good.
Let's do it like City Councilman Tom LaBonge said in his recent newsletter: "I do support a dedicated Rapid Bus lane during peak traffic hours along Wilshire to encourage riders… as long as the MTA fixes the roadway they are helping to deteriorate."
Whether to encourage more riders or to move increased amounts of people further, farther and faster, let's do something drastic. Yeah, there is going to be the good and the bad and the effects and the screamers and the praisers just like anything else that happens. So what. Do you want to pussyfoot the solutions that may or may not work until our retirement or find a solution that may or may not work for six-months from now? Call it a 3-month pilot study -- we don't care. Until that Purple Line Subway is moving, be a little reckless.
Everyone is screaming anyway. Doing something a little risky is going to produce what? Screaming.
Photo by Rice and D via Flickr
| 
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
[ report this ]
I am 100% in support of this. You are completely right that someone has to do something drastic. We have all the city officials constantly prancing around trying to please everyone in this massive city, it gets us nowhere.
Ever tried taking the Metro "Rapid" on Wilshire during rush hour? There isn't a damn thing that is rapid about it! It slugs along, crowded as all hell, as fast as traffic will take it.
I don't like having to take cues from New York but damnit, their public transport works. You don't see cars parked on main roads and you see that the buses usually have their own lanes. Why is this so difficult? Everyone is so convinced that it is necessary for everyone in L.A. to have a car that it prevents anyone from making any changes to remedy that. Have the BUS ONLY lanes and we'll have people taking public transport!
I also urge people to send the Governor a letter to NOT kill the proposal for a high-speed train between San Francisco and Los Angeles! Amtrak is a piece of subsidized, leftover JUNK! Let's be at the forefront of this!
[ report this ]
I'm just hoping it will provide a lane for emergency services. I've seen traffic so gridlocked on Wilshire that ambulances can't get through.
[ report this ]
It's interesting that you mention that because a few weeks ago I was talking to my Dad and he works right there on Westwood Blvd. in the village and he watches these ambulances on their way to the Medical Center which can't get through and are at the mercy of the traffic at whatever time they end up there.
[ report this ]
That emergency services angle is interesting. I wonder if anyone has studied effects of traffic congestion on ES response time and survical rates? i.e. if your house in Westwood starts burning at 5:30PM, or you have a heart attack and the ambulance is headed for UCLA at 8AM, does Wilshire traffic matter?
[ report this ]
Total bullshit. Study after study shows that you can't force people onto buses by adding bus lanes. They only serve to annoy people who are trying to get to and from work the only way they can, in their cars.
This is a car city, solutions need to be built around cars. I'm all for something drastic (such as identifying the biggest employers whose employees are forced to drive long distances to work, and staggering their start times, etc.) but dedicated buslanes are only going to f up Wilshire even more, and THEY WONT MAKE PEOPLE USE THE BUS.
[ report this ]
i use the wilshire rapid line solely because it has the dedicated lane... so eat it teddy.
[ report this ]
Teddy sed:
"I'm all for something drastic (such as identifying the biggest employers whose employees are forced to drive long distances to work, and staggering their start times, etc.)"
Oh brilliant idea. Tell me who these big employers are who dictate the distance their employees must live from the office ("You've got the job sir. Just realize we require you to live 50 miles away. Company policy."). I've never heard of this before, enlighten me plz.
[ report this ]
Fred, the employers obviously don't dictate it, simple economics do. There are many jobs which do not pay well enough for the majority (or large minority) of their employees to live in the area where the work takes place. This actually includes a very large number of city employees on the Westside and Beach Cities. This problem is by no means unique to LA, in pricey NYC it's even worse, but their public transport can easily handle it.
Staggered start times have been used in other cities with good results. So have carpool credits for employers.
[ report this ]
eck, one person or even 100 do not make a dent in traffic. The reality is that the vast majority of commuters are not able to take the bus for one of one thousand reasons. I am guessing that you do not have kids, do not work a second job, do not have to run errands during your lunch hour etc. The city was built around cars and endorsing more gridlock because it fits into your lifestyle is not a responsible way to advocate for an improved city.
[ report this ]
I totally support the dedicated bus lanes (an immediate, perhaps temporary solution),
while the Purple Line subway will be built (a longer but a permanent solution).
As for private auto drivers, they need to start changing their mentality! Life is not about cars. Or rather - life is not only about cars! There are other options too. And once a dedicated lane is built, people should try that, and will realize that those dedicated bus lanes DO work!