|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Feb 25, 2011 15:49:30 GMT -8
While this is historical, it's also relevant to the Gold Line, so off we go:
The former Los Angeles Metro "P" streetcar line ran along portions of the new Gold Line route, including over the 1st street bridge.
The Metro librarian (I assume Matthew Barrett) has been steadily going through the stacks and finding interesting tidbits to post. He found the following home made film of the P line over the First street bridge, taken just before it was shut down in 1963.
It's interesting to see the differences between the two. The Gold line is dedicated (with the bridge expanded to accommodate), but the P line ran in traffic. Of course, at that time there was very little compared to today.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 25, 2011 16:13:37 GMT -8
One does wonder if we would be where we are now (trying to rebuild all of those rail lines we once had) if more of those lines had been separated from traffic, or even underground or elevated.
It wasn't just the big, evil GM conspiracy, but also the lack of dedicated ROWs which killed Los Angeles' transit.
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 26, 2011 10:27:15 GMT -8
Wow, what a great film, not just for the train but also to see how the area looked back then. In many ways, not much has changed. I didn't realize Mariachi Plaza was once home to a Standard Oil ("Esso") gas station.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 26, 2011 18:00:35 GMT -8
Mariachi Plaza definitely looks better without a gas station on it!
And although this film doesn't seem to show it, this would have been the dark ages for Little Tokyo... after internment but before community revitalization.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Feb 26, 2011 18:31:25 GMT -8
Regarding the movie: I think the Model A Ford belonged to a railfan; by 1963 they weren't very common. Also: The PCC cars in the movie were the P-3 type, a group of 40 all-electric cars bought in 1948 by LA Transit Lines, which was part of the National City Lines empire. 3165, the last streetcar bought for service in LA is preserved at Orange Empire Ry. Museum. Similar cars are in regular service in San Francisco on the "F" line.
|
|
|
|
Post by carter on Feb 26, 2011 20:06:13 GMT -8
One does wonder if we would be where we are now (trying to rebuild all of those rail lines we once had) if more of those lines had been separated from traffic, or even underground or elevated. It wasn't just the big, evil GM conspiracy, but also the lack of dedicated ROWs which killed Los Angeles' transit. James, you're definitely right on it being bigger than a GM conspiracy, but you're not totally right on the lack of dedicated ROWs. My impression from your comments at Streetsblog and here and elsewhere is that you're not from the Westside, so I'll gladly give you a pass on this one  But if you look at the West LA part of the Redcar map, all of those lines had their own dedicated median. Off the top of my head, they are: Santa Monica Blvd, Venice Blvd, Culver Blvd, parts of Olympic Blvd, and the western and eastern San Vicente Blvds. If we still had those, transit in West L.A. would be a whole different ball game. We'd look more like Toronto or the Embarcardero in SF. Of course, we'd still need the Expo and Subway for the higher speed and capacity long distance trips.  and  |
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 27, 2011 19:35:37 GMT -8
well, you are correct, I'm not from the Westside. I'm from the South Bay.
I fail to see what that has to do with anything, since the video was a video of Yellow Cars, not Red Cars, in East Los Angeles and not the Westside.
Even if you can claim greater authority from having been there, it reminds me a bit of the Internment denier who pointed out I "wasn't there" (wasn't old enough for the World War II camps) — there is plenty of historical evidence available to work from.
Certainly there were Red Car lines with dedicated ROWs, but there were streetcar lines without dedicated ROWs, and the dedicated Red Car tracks weren't operating in isolation.
Los Angeles should have converted to subway or even El trains; whenever the subject came up, it was rejected.
We are starting over, and thankfully, the Westside will get a subway this time.
|
|
|
|
Post by carter on Feb 27, 2011 21:57:17 GMT -8
Not really sure what my point was anymore. I guess it was something like: even the lines with their own ROWs got turned into tree-filled medians in the end.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Feb 28, 2011 0:46:00 GMT -8
fail to see what that has to do with anything, since the video was a video of Yellow Cars, not Red Cars, in East Los Angeles and not the Westside. James, I think Carter had a point. The Yellow Cars did not survive as streetcars... but they were almost all replaced by buses, and many of those bus routes exist today. I like streetcars a little better than buses (less bumpy!), but a bus on the street isn't much different than a streetcar in a shared lane. Its true that the transit system was in decline during the years of "bustitution" (switching from streetcars to buses), but the transit mode wasn't the main issue. The Red Line tracks, on the other hand, were often ripped out but NOT replaced by a bus on the same exclusive right-of-way, so rapid transit was lost in Los Angeles for those dark decades. I agree that the Yellow Line streetcars would have been more likely to survive and thrive if they had been given exclusive right-of-way down the streets (and I support bus lanes on many streets today), but the Red Line did have it. |
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Feb 28, 2011 2:14:42 GMT -8
The problem is, it's not quite so clear-cut as "the Yellow Cars were streetcars, while the Pacific Electric was exclusive"
The Pacific Electric wasn't all exclusive. It would have been better if it had been.
The truth was a little closer to the Blue Line. The Blue Line actually IMPROVES upon the old Pacific Electric route that it follows; at least it "jumps" over major intersections on bridges which didn't exist back in the Red Car days.
(The same is true of the Expo Line. Building trenches near USC and bridges elsewhere.)
And the Red Cars, just like the Blue Line, was street running going into downtown Long Beach. And in Hollywood, and in quite a few other places where the exclusive tracks ran out.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Feb 28, 2011 17:52:37 GMT -8
We should also remember that when both the rail systems were declining and disappearing, and up into the early 1970's, gasoline was about 25 cents a gallon, and one could buy a usable car for a few hundred dollars (and sometimes less). No smog checks to worry about either. Keep the old clunker running with Sears, Pep Boys or wrecking yard parts, and when something expensive broke, find another banger to putter around in.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Mar 1, 2011 0:44:02 GMT -8
The Pacific Electric wasn't all exclusive. It would have been better if it had been. The truth was a little closer to the Blue Line. ... ... the Red Cars, just like the Blue Line, was street running going into downtown Long Beach. ... I don't know the full history of the Pacific Electric lines, but I seem to recall that there were some routes that acted as streecars, in residential parts of Long Beach and Pasadena. However, I would like to note that the Blue Line in Long Beach does have its own right-of-way. It is in a street median and doesn't have crossing gates, so speeds are limited to the speed limit on the street, but the train doesn't get stuck in traffic, like the Yellow Cars did. I don't know if the Red Cars to Hollywood shared a lane with cars, or if they had their own lane on Hollywood Blvd. Anyone know? |
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 1, 2011 14:14:56 GMT -8
I would argue that it's a somewhat nitpicky distinction, but you are ultimately correct. The best possible solution would be complete separation, as in a tunnel, elevated or in the middle of a freeway. Fast, and the fewest possible number of accidents. Of course, this would be expensive over long distances. Almost as good would be an exclusive, ground-level, non-street right of way, since you would still have fast speeds and crossing gates at intersections. Metro, in its wisdom, has decided that its street-running sections need to have exclusive lanes, which is a step above streetcar street-running. The Downtown Los Angeles streetcar will be completely street-running, which I don't see as a problem because it will be a low-floor circulator trolley route, not a commuter train. I can imagine such a thing being popular with the business lunch crowd, tourists and visitors as well as conventioneers. = Here's the Pacific Electric street-running in Echo Park.Pacific Electric in Hollywood, appears to be mixed-traffic |
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Mar 1, 2011 19:25:38 GMT -8
For anyone interested in railway history, not just Southern California, but all over, next Saturday (Mar. 5) there will be a Railroadiana Swap Meet at Orange Empire Ry. Museum in Perris. (oerm.org) There are usually books on Pacific Electric for sale there if anyone is interested. And real, full size, authentic PE and LARy cars will be running for a "blast from the past".
|
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Mar 2, 2011 19:31:44 GMT -8
The Downtown Los Angeles streetcar will be completely street-running, which I don't see as a problem because it will be a low-floor circulator trolley route, not a commuter train. I can imagine such a thing being popular with the business lunch crowd, tourists and visitors as well as conventioneers. It's true that most of the people involved are thinking of a mixed-traffic streetcar, but I'm hopeful that the streetcar can be planned to run in transit-only lanes. There are certainly enough buses downtown to merit a transit-only lane on every street already, and streetcars are much more successful when the are not at risk of being blocked by a broken-down automobile. The biggest limitation of streetcars is the fact that they can't go around anything in the tracks ahead, whether a car or another train. But an exclusive, bus/streetcar lane would go a long way to preventing this from being a problem. |
|
|
|
Post by wad on Mar 17, 2011 3:11:11 GMT -8
It's true that most of the people involved are thinking of a mixed-traffic streetcar, but I'm hopeful that the streetcar can be planned to run in transit-only lanes. There are certainly enough buses downtown to merit a transit-only lane on every street already, and streetcars are much more successful when the are not at risk of being blocked by a broken-down automobile. If you read Jarrett Walker's Human Transit blog, he says that taking a lane for transit service of any kind, bus or rail, will dramatically improve service. If you can take away a lane for a streetcar, you can take it away for the bus as well and get the same improvements. I'm with you on the transit-only lanes in downtown. I had always been in favor of taking away a whole street (I think Broadway would be the best) and running all Metro buses along the street. DASH buses would run along the other streets with high-frequency services. |
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Mar 18, 2011 23:30:15 GMT -8
I'm with you on the transit-only lanes in downtown. I had always been in favor of taking away a whole street (I think Broadway would be the best) and running all Metro buses along the street. DASH buses would run along the other streets with high-frequency services. Wow, every bus on Broadway? What would the headways be at the peak - every 10 seconds? Our bus system may be too big to fit on one street, even with two bus-only lanes on each side and multiple bus stops on each block. But it might make sense to consolidate bus service to 2 or 3 different north-south and east-west streets, perhaps 1st and 7th for east-west routes, and Flower/Figueroa and Main/Spring for the north-south routes. With double transit-only lanes on each of those streets the buses would flow nicely, and there would be enough room for all the buses to make it to the right stop. I think... Portland and Minneapolis manage to get most all the buses on one couplet or transit mall, but they are much smaller cities. With all the buses on Broadway, it might look like this some days: latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedailymirror/images/2007/11/20/1911_main_street_traffic_2.jpg |
|
|
|
Post by crzwdjk on Mar 19, 2011 8:54:09 GMT -8
Note the dual-gauge tracks in that picture: that traffic jam most likely consisted of both Red and Yellow cars, sharing the same street running section.
|
|
|
|
Post by thanks4goingmetro on Mar 31, 2011 15:35:43 GMT -8
Very good for a home video and now it's worth more than gold as a historical document of Los Angeles' past transit vibrance! Looking at the past offers us the 20/20 vision with hindsight. Looking at the motives of Standard Oil, Firestone, and General Motors the key ideas that they sold were "freedom" while the real things they desired was money of course and to have cars occupy the vast spaces in the streets that the streetcars were then in, like Taken For A Ride film explains. I don't think that those companies acted alone, when all of the privately owned streetcar operators had consolidated over a number of years into some very large and influential businesses, yet still were losing money and little by little moved over to motor coaches for that cheaper "freedom" that GM/Firestone/Standard was selling. Sometimes I go back and forth thinking about with the 20/20 vision we are granted with in the history and reality of today in Los Angeles transit on whether the system lost was worth upgrading (some very much indeed was), yet they put it off for far too long, and though it wouldn't have saved those relics of companies the resulting infrastructure might have been worthwhile enough to be absorbed by a more vigilant and financially endowed MTA to continue on with subsidies (and early 20th century safety and liabilities for that matter) to be a streetcar-light rail hybrid system like what San Francisco's Muni Metro or Toronto's TTC Streetcar system is today. There's no doubt that Los Angeles would look differently and especially think differently about public transportation and possibly less jaded about climbing aboard a bus for that matter. It would still not be a New York City because at its essence the City of Los Angeles is poly-centric and not a monolith for business districts in any one particular area (even if downtown remained intact from the 50s) and people would still ride from corridor to corridor en mass predictably. I just think that the capacities of the old system would not have held up as evidenced by Muni Metro's line that are overburdened and stuck with mostly 2 car platforms or even like our Blue Line one might think after the Regional Connector is constructed that Blue Line will have no more capacity. I guess the BRU (or RRU) in this alternative reality would be harping Metro for more continued rail service) We'd probably still be building new speedier lines but as rapid bypass (because streetcar systems are by and large local service) in Los Angeles especially with the old system intact. Though it would be newer lines passing up the streetcar derived local service trains instead of speedy light rail trains passing up traffic in medians and bridges life would just be a heck of a lot different, a slow but reliable commute for many or wide stop spacing (rapid) for the lucky much like today, and much easier to battle NIMBYs, the public psyche on trains (situations like Farmdale and the Blue Line would not exist) and other forces such as the power of the purse to justify more public transit expansion in Los Angeles. It's true that most of the people involved are thinking of a mixed-traffic streetcar, but I'm hopeful that the streetcar can be planned to run in transit-only lanes. There are certainly enough buses downtown to merit a transit-only lane on every street already, and streetcars are much more successful when the are not at risk of being blocked by a broken-down automobile. If you read Jarrett Walker's Human Transit blog, he says that taking a lane for transit service of any kind, bus or rail, will dramatically improve service. If you can take away a lane for a streetcar, you can take it away for the bus as well and get the same improvements. I'm with you on the transit-only lanes in downtown. I had always been in favor of taking away a whole street (I think Broadway would be the best) and running all Metro buses along the street. DASH buses would run along the other streets with high-frequency services. BTW the article by Jarrett Walker is found here: www.humantransit.org/2011/03/rail-bus-differences-contd.html |
|
|
|
Post by wad on Apr 3, 2011 5:00:13 GMT -8
Wow, every bus on Broadway? What would the headways be at the peak - every 10 seconds? Our bus system may be too big to fit on one street, even with two bus-only lanes on each side and multiple bus stops on each block. I should clarify. It would be most of the downtown buses already running north-south. The east-west lines would stay as they are. |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Apr 3, 2011 7:09:31 GMT -8
Wow, every bus on Broadway? What would the headways be at the peak - every 10 seconds? Our bus system may be too big to fit on one street, even with two bus-only lanes on each side and multiple bus stops on each block. I should clarify. It would be most of the downtown buses already running north-south. The east-west lines would stay as they are. Personally, I don't want our transit system or downtown to be singular focused. You want a multi-dimensional cultural center with attractions on nearly each and every street. Hollywood, Santa Monica and Pasadena are very singular focused with Hollywood blvd, 3rd stret and Colorado. Downtown LA should be a city where there's than one street that defines an area. Currently, 7th street and Spring street are the two streets booming with nightlife. Broadway will get there eventually. Just this last week a brand new outdoor rooftop lounge was announced for 5th/Hill to open this summer with multiple venues on top the Pershing Square building. So, I don't want our transit system to be singular focused and move buses onto Broadway and/or closing Broadway to all cars. I would support having Broadway be open to buses, taxis and streetcar only with restricted driving for personal automobiles. But I find streets open for all modes of transport more urban, lively and hip than those closed for cars. That's my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by wad on Apr 4, 2011 4:18:11 GMT -8
So, I don't want our transit system to be singular focused and move buses onto Broadway and/or closing Broadway to all cars. I would support having Broadway be open to buses, taxis and streetcar only with restricted driving for personal automobiles. But I find streets open for all modes of transport more urban, lively and hip than those closed for cars. That's my opinion. The focus of the rerouting would be independent of the activity around the streets. The primary reason for routing the buses on Broadway is to simplify the Metro system (buses on one street as opposed to a melange of buses running along various north-south streets for little practical reason) and perhaps move the buses through downtown faster. The other streets wouldn't lose bus services; DASH would run on the parallel streets. As for place-making, I'd leave those to the rail lines. Stations, unlike bus stops, have a civic gravitational pull. |
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Apr 4, 2011 20:52:11 GMT -8
Wad, it looks like there are almost 100 buses per hour per direction on Hill, Broadway, Spring and Main at peak times (There are about 10 lines that run 6 buses per hour, and about another 10 that run 2 to 4 per hour). That's assuming that you don't consolidate the buses from Grand/Olive, which have another 60 or 70 buses per hour per direction. I think it would be difficult to have a bus every 30 seconds on Broadway, unless there were two lanes for transit in each direction. Jarrett from Human Transit thought that Minneanapolis needed two bus lanes in each direction for their transit system, in a smaller city: www.humantransit.org/2009/11/minneapolis-unlocking-downtown-with-transit-malls.htmlInstead, I would recommend having two northbound bus-only lanes on Hill, and two south-bound on Broadway. The streetcar would run as a couplet on Hill and Broadway as well. Buses would be grouped to stop on different blocks (you wouldn't want all 20 buses to try to stop at the same corner), with each stopping only every 4 blocks. Grand and Olive would have a similar treatment, and about half of the buses would go on each of these couplets. This is actually pretty similar to the current system, except for the current lack of bus-only lanes and lack of organization. It would still provide service to the top of Bunker Hill, which otherwise is a bit hard to access from Broadway. |
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Jul 29, 2011 8:41:27 GMT -8
Here's a video the Metro Librarian just posted. It introduces the Eastside extension project and shows what the area looked like immediately preceding construction.
|
|
