tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post7704394613608221678..comments2024-02-01T04:37:41.878-05:00Comments on Cap'n Transit Rides Again: Winning by default, or losing by a landslideCap'n Transithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17057887736728828646noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-65789228065302199422013-01-29T20:18:49.407-05:002013-01-29T20:18:49.407-05:00@Alon: There really aren't any areas in SJ wit...@Alon: There really aren't any areas in SJ with any 'major' development, but Story Rd, Tully Rd, Alum Rock Ave all come to mind as bustling roads with bustling businessesJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14426754833052407475noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-12815223525210706852013-01-29T20:10:47.656-05:002013-01-29T20:10:47.656-05:00Sorry if I wasn't clear, Amanda. The picture ...Sorry if I wasn't clear, Amanda. The picture is there to show that right next to the line is a wide-open highway. Transit in medians is okay, if it <b>wins</b> the competition.<br /><br />One way to win the competition is not to suck. The other way is for the competitor to suck worse.<br /><br />Alon, rather than repeating superficial observations about "aspirational" transit, you might take into account what I wrote about <a href="http://capntransit.blogspot.com/2012/08/selling-transit-with-glamour-or-value.html" rel="nofollow">choices and glamour</a>. Value doesn't actually affect Glamour all that much.Cap'n Transithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17057887736728828646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-6130344548869539092013-01-29T19:33:33.406-05:002013-01-29T19:33:33.406-05:00Does San Jose have wide arterials flanked by major...Does San Jose have wide arterials flanked by major development? In Vancouver, parts of the SkyTrain system are elevated over such roads - for example, much of the Millennium Line is elevated over the Lougheed Highway, which is a fast, pedestrian-hostile road but is not a freeway and has malls right next to the SkyTrain stations and dense-by-suburban-standards residential development on side streets behind the highway. One of the future expansion proposals is also elevated over a similar road, the Fraser Highway. The SkyTrain system is fully grade-separated, but those roads are configured for fast through-traffic and the strategy of following them could be adapted to at-grade light rail.Alonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17267294744186811858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-84882824265518531992013-01-29T18:28:39.938-05:002013-01-29T18:28:39.938-05:00Shorter version: relative quality matters, but abs...Shorter version: relative quality matters, but absolute quality also matters, because people have the "do nothing" option.<br /><br />Example: I hear about some place I would like to go. But the traffic sucks, and there's no good transit option, so I stay home. (happens to me in LA all the time)<br /><br />Good transit will have its own induced demand. And while making things harder for drivers will reduce car trips, it might not necessarily increase transit trips.<br /><br />Transit is competing with cars. But they're both also competing with doing nothing.LetsGoLAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06107329708370977966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-37426775021892727082013-01-29T11:30:09.900-05:002013-01-29T11:30:09.900-05:00The other thing is, it's hard to lay down ligh...The other thing is, it's hard to lay down light rail track and totally avoid any roads. You could just as easily change that picture to be the Winchester line chugging down Tasman or Java drive surrounded by cars during rush hour. Pretty much the only place for VTA light rail to expand that's not around roads is the remainder of the Vasona branch to Cupertino when it inevitably shuts down. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-78233035644027847392013-01-29T08:59:30.350-05:002013-01-29T08:59:30.350-05:00My own opinion, from having taken VTA every day fo...My own opinion, from having taken VTA every day for the past 4 years, is that the Santa Teresa line south of downtown SJ is actually one of the few bright points of the system (along with the Winchester line from Campbell to Diridon, since it has its own ROW). San Jose is such a spread out suburban eyesore, that if you tried running light rail on the street from south San Jose downtown, it'd take *forever*. <br /><br />There are circumstances where it makes sense not to run in freeways, of course-even Portland's lauded MAX has plenty of freeway median running. In an ideal world, both Stevens Creek and El Camino would have light rail running on them (its also important to remember that most light rail in Santa Clara County serves San Jose, not the rest of the valley).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-51558242543115648122013-01-29T08:47:58.701-05:002013-01-29T08:47:58.701-05:00But you can't post all this shit about the VTA...But you can't post all this shit about the VTA without having lived here, or at least taken it. I mean, you're just ignoring everything we've said about it. The VTA is indeed in competition with driving, and the way to change that is to improve (massively) VTA light rail service. <br /><br />Ironically, that picture shows the freeway median on the Santa Teresa line south of San Jose, where times to get to downtown San Jose are pretty competitive with driving. From downtown north is where the line horribly fails. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-55188002825498470402013-01-28T18:03:12.368-05:002013-01-28T18:03:12.368-05:00Agree w/ Alon. People in those Third World cities ...Agree w/ Alon. People in those Third World cities ride it not only because the roads and parking suck worse, but because they can't even afford a car. If people get wealthier, and the transit doesn't stop sucking, they'll buy cars and there will be political pressure to build freeways.<br /><br />Consider China's cities, which have been rapidly evolving from Third World to developed world over the last 20 years. In 1994, Shanghai had no subway, and now it has the largest subway system in the world. Transit has gotten a lot less sucky there, but even so, many people have been buying cars and there is pressure to build freeways. As Alon said, cars become "aspirational".<br /><br />This attitude persists in many US cities too. Lots of people riding transit in LA would like to have their own cars. I moved to LA from Boston, and sometimes I get strange looks when I tell people I <i>choose</i> to take transit. "But you could afford to drive!" they say.<br /><br />The real trick is to try make the transit better and build that constituency, without aggravating the driving lobby to the point that they elect Rob Ford, who comes into office and axes all your transit expansion plans.LetsGoLAhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06107329708370977966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-86774337818244862002013-01-28T09:13:30.552-05:002013-01-28T09:13:30.552-05:00
The simplest way to state this is: mass transit s...<br />The simplest way to state this is: mass transit should not compete with cars, rather it should replace cars, especially for commuting.<br /><br />This is the viewpoint all across Europe and it works 99% of the time.kantorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06397015722269087299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-12339505565741146412013-01-27T19:38:45.992-05:002013-01-27T19:38:45.992-05:00The problem with sucky transit is that it turns ca...The problem with sucky transit is that it turns cars into an aspirational product. In Israel, car ownership is about the same as in New York, and buses have a very high mode share. Does it mean people like riding transit? No, it means social justice protesters fight against gas tax hikes and oppose upzoning on infrastructure capacity grounds and say the buses are so unusable that People Need Cars. Transportation networks comparable to those of the 1920s will lead to political effort to change the situation to be more like the 1960s. In contrast, where transit is useful - i.e. where it is frequent, comfortable, fast enough, etc. - people do not regard cars as so aspirational, and will support further reductions in car infrastructure on environmental grounds.<br /><br />The other problem, completely independently of cars, is that sucky transit is a sucky social service. If I live in Providence and want to get to Boston, less-than-hourly commuter rail makes this inconvenient for me regardless of whether there are Interstates. Reducing auto options makes half-hourly takts and a fast EMU schedule easier to implement, but they can also be implemented in competition with the expressways (and, done right, beat them), and historically before the Interstates service was not frequent or fast.Alonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17267294744186811858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5862444008740250372.post-84040237522327125422013-01-27T16:59:37.877-05:002013-01-27T16:59:37.877-05:00I sort of tried to capture this in my statement th...I sort of tried to capture this in my statement that to be successful, a transit system needs to go from where people are to where they want to go in a reasonable time compared to the alternatives. A different statement of the same sort of idea is the general rule of transit in LA: it doesn't particularly suck, and takes you pretty much anywhere, it just takes three times longer than driving.crzwdjkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06394805356595604336noreply@blogger.com