LA Transportation is a bummer

A subway train pulls out of L.A.’s Hollywood and Vine Station. photo courtesy of Howard Shapiro / MCT

Anyone who has hopped on a bus in Los Angeles can tell you that it is sometimes an experience to forget. There are awkward sights and smells everywhere, which is tolerable, but if you’re a regular commuter, chances are you have been left stranded every once in a while. This is because Los Angeles public transportation, frankly, sucks.

As a late-bloomer in the world of driving, I became a seasoned veteran of the Los Angeles Metro bus and rail lines. Admittedly, I grew to even love riding public transportation out here, but it was a love/hate relationship. I loved every aspect of being around people, and going on wild bus adventures. Even reading while commuting

was a luxury to me. However, I also hated the bus, because it was like a bad friend– never around when you needed it the most.

Compared to most other major metropolitan cities, Los Angeles has a primitive mass transit system. This is partially because Los Angeles, as a city, was built much later than those on the east coast. In New York, for example, it is incredibly easy to get from point A to point B without using a car. This is because the city was modeled traditionally before the advent of the automobile, so buildings were closer together, and the infrastructure for a huge subway system was made.

In Los Angeles, it’s an automobile’s world, and if you don’t have a car, you’re kind of screwed. At most, the city provides busses and some semblance of a subway or rail line, but many of the bus lines are unreliable. When I was a freshman at CSUN, I rode on the 239 Bus, which runs from Encino to Sun Valley, using White Oak Avenue and Lindley Avenue as two of its main arteries. This bus would show up once an hour, and though there was a timetable schedule, it would often show up randomly within the hour. Many times, I was left stuck at the bus stop on Lindley Avenue and Nordhoff Boulevard, waiting. Sometimes, it was raining. Sometimes, there were creepy men trying to talk to me.

One time, when I was able to catch the 239, I realized just how awful some of the busses in Los Angeles are. Every time the bus would stop, it would stall, and every time it stalled, it took longer to start back up again. By the time we were nearing my Encino stop, I was praying to the bus gods that I would get home. If the bus broke down before my stop, I would probably have to wait for another 239 to come, and that would undoubtedly take an hour, at least. I ended up barely making it home, and I suspect that the bus broke down somewhere toward the last stop.
The heart of the problem is that highways and streets are of a higher priority in Los Angeles than other modes of transportation, and as such, they are funded the most. The city was built around the concept of an automobile, and this also explains why there is urban sprawl, and everything is so spread apart here.

This city did, at one time, have a great transportation system. It was before World War Two, and it was a rail line called the Red Car. The Red Car would run throughout the entire city, connecting everyone in a fashion similar to that of San Francisco’s cable car lines. However, in 1961, the infrastructure of the Red Car was ripped apart, and replaced by wide freeways and track housing. Currently, Los Angeles has improved its public transportation, with its subway lines and the newest Orange Line, but there is still much work to be done. Had the city never ripped out the Red Car infrastructure, we would have never been in this mess to begin with.

In the times before I had a car to drive, I would constantly have thoughts of how to make Los Angeles a more connected city with public transportation. The more I would think about this dilemma, the more I would realize that the answer is very complicated.

The truth is, we had our chance, Los Angeles, and we blew it. We could have kept the Red Cars, but instead, we are now all slaves to gas-guzzling, anti-social automobiles. And though the city has made vast improvements on how to commute sans-car, there is still a very long an expensive road ahead of us.

top

Disclaimer: The Daily Sundial is not responsible for comments posted on dailysundial.com. In accordance with the Communications Decency Act of 1996 the Sundial is not liable for the content of comments. By commenting, all persons posting on dailysundial.com have agreed to our comment policy. If a comment does not abide by the comment policy the Sundial reserves the right to delete comments without warning. The Daily Sundial advises persons commenting not to abuse their First Amendment rights, and to avoid comments of hate speech or encouraging violence.

  • http://www.socata.net Kymberleigh Richards

    Another fact that the author should have researched more completely is that public transit service is always scheduled based on demand. Line 239, which she referenced, is a line that runs largely in residential areas; when you have little non-residential stretches along a route, you’re not going to generate the kind of ridership that demands frequent service. (In fact, there was a proposal a couple of years ago to only run Line 239 during weekday rush hours, and only the fact that the route passes along the west side of the CSUN campus kept midday service alive … and with the state removing transit operations subsidies, who knows how much longer 239 will be able to hold on?)

    Note that there are also Metro lines on Reseda (Line 240 local and Line 741 Rapid) and Nordhoff (Line 166 local and Line 364 limited-stop express) that also serve CSUN, and meet the criteria for more frequent service. Choosing a line that is a low performer to base your argument upon while ignoring the lines whose performance is contrary to your argument is hardly fair from a journalistic standpoint.

    And while it is true that the San Fernando Valley does not generate the kind of ridership that the Central City/Westside corridor does — there is likely never going to be the same frequency of service here as there is on Wilshire or Santa Monica Blvds. or on Vermont or Western Aves. — there are several corridors that do generate reasonably high ridership, such as Van Nuys Blvd. and Sherman Way, and those corridors have significantly higher service levels than do the streets where buses run only one-half to two-thirds full. Again, there seems to be a convenient ignorance of these facts in your commentary. (Contrary to commenter Mike’s belief, service levels aren’t based on the % of the population in an area, but on the % of that population that uses the service.)

  • Marc

    If you are looking for fault/scapegoats, look to yourselves and to your parents/grandparents – All lived here during the Red Cars (and Yellow Cars) era and since that time when we have had new transportation systems (including freeways) built. Currently we are getting new systems built for decades to come so maybe that will help. Oh, only the Metro (MTA) is responsible 99.9% of public transportation in LA Country – The city council has nothing to do with it as it’s a separate entity… Read up before you post…

    This is a long, complicated problem that took decades to reach this point and will take decades to fix/improve…

  • http://novotopia.com MeanerMina

    Excellent article! Here’s more:
    Jpods – http://www.jpods.com
    PodCar City conference in San Jose – http://podcarcity.org/events/podcar-city-san-jose/
    The Transit Coalition, LA Public Transportation watchdogs – http://www.thetransitcoalition.us
    Save Public Services – a ballot initiative to prevent the government from diverting local funds raised locally for specific purposes (for example the Measure R ½ cent sales tax for public transportation we approved last year) – http://www.savelocalservices.com/

  • Mike

    With the exception of Ventura Blvd and the Orange line, the SFV is woefully underserved. Perhaps a retired person can rely on a 1 hour bus headway, but a student, worker, or anyone else with a deadline can’t possible afford to be an hour late if they miss/or get skipped by a bus. SFV is nearly 30% of Los Angeles, but we only get about 15% of the service. Metro and the LA City council needs to be held accountable for this. The Orange line, even with its flaws get high ridership and is always crowded proving that if regular service is built it will attract riders.