Why Aren't People Rioting in the Streets?Yesterday it took me TWO HOURS to commute by surface streets from 14th St. in Santa Monica to Fairfax/Santa Monica Blvd. in West Hollywood. I avoided the 10 due to multiple accidents reported, though in hindsight I should have taken it. This is a roughly 10 miles trip which should NOT take two hours to make.
What astounds me is that people tolerate these commute times and regard them as normal. There is no excuse for a 10-mile trip taking two hours to complete.
A "subway to the sea" would have completely eliminated the need for me to make this commute by car and would have likely found me at my destination within 20 minutes of boarding the train. 120 minutes of aggravation, wear and tear on my car, wasted gas (at over $2.50/gallon), the risk of getting into an accident, and the risk of being a victim of road rage versus 20 minutes of being able to sit back, relax, and read a book or newspaper. It's a no-brainer, no matter how much it costs.
The ridership estimates of the current Red Line and other rail routes in Los Angeles cannot be used to accurately predict ridership of a Wilshire Corridor subway extension that extends through Fairfax, Hollywood, and out to Santa Monica as the current system does not serve enough areas that would make it beneficial for the average middle-class Los Angelino to give up their SUV.
The Wilshire Corridor and Sepulveda Pass are the two most heavily trafficed routes in Southern California. You cannot base estimated rail ridership on current bus figures. Trust me, I never take the bus but when I lived in New York I took the subway exclusively. I would not take a bus...period. There's just something about it that I don't like. The stop and go, the fumes, the sight and sounds of traffic. It just isn't relaxing to me, whereas I would give up my car in a hearbeat to take a train (below or above ground, it doesn't matter as long as it's moving).
Why aren't Los Angelinos rioting in the streets over traffic? (I'm not really encouraging a riot, just using the term to make a point). But seriously, why are so many people putting up with and accepting the traffic here and then opposing the subway in the meantime? Am I missing something? Can someone explain this to me?
I agree with the mayor of Beverly Hills, the price is unavoidable but must be met. There are no more options. We saved money for decades by ignoring transit, now it's time to cough it up. I'd pay an extra 0.25% sales tax if I could be guaranteed it would go to subway and rail construction solely.
Lastly, however, we cannot leave the issue up to voters as a ballot measure. If we did then the oil comapnies and auto manufacturers would bombard the public with anti-transit advertising that the grass roots organizations and local government would not be able to combat. I truly feel that voters would be quickly brainwashed by the oil companies and defeat a mass transit plan. A defeat at this point would pretty much be the final nail in the coffin.
posted at 09:08