|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 21, 2011 15:20:00 GMT -8
First, here is a brief history of the Expo Line:
The line was originally built in 1875, with the name “The Los Angeles & Independence Railroad.” Southern Pacific bought it in 1877 and later leased it to electric-railway companies after it was electrified in 1908. These electric railroads merged under the name of Pacific Electric in 1911. It was known as the “Santa Monica Air Line” for most of the history, providing freight and passenger service between Los Angeles and Santa Monica. Pacific Electric discontinued the passenger service on the Santa Monica Air Line in 1953. Southern Pacific continued the freight service, with the last freight service to Fisher Lumber in Santa Monica taking place in 1987 and to the Culver Junction circa 1989. Metro purchased the line from Southern Pacific in 1990 for future public-transit use.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 21, 2011 15:33:18 GMT -8
The Jefferson/La Cienega stop of the Expo Line was originally called Sentous and the name Sentous still appears on maps. So, what was Sentous? This was asked in the past by Alex K. and we had some explanation about some French businessmen, although not fully satisfactory. It looks like this stop was named after a slaughterhouse owned by Sentous Brothers. It existed since 1880 and it got modernized in 1906. Sentous brothers were rich land owners. Louis Sentous died a millionaire from the meat business before the family opened the modernized facility at Sentous (Jefferson/La Cienega) in 1906. Pacific Electric electric trains carried the meat to Los Angeles from the facility. These are nice reads from Los Angeles Herald, thanks to Palms/Cheviot Hills historian and Expo Greenway founder Jonathan Weiss: LA Herald 1888/02/19LA Herald 1888/04/08LA Herald 1906/03/21Some progress has happened since those days at Sentous, where the slaughterhouse is long gone and now replaced by a brand-new Metro park-and-ride structure and some LADWP sewage facility.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 21, 2011 17:05:57 GMT -8
Wright Brothers invented the flying machine on December 17, 1903. Not long after, on May 25, 1909, an "Air Line Flyer Service" was inaugurated from Santa Monica to Los Angeles. This was Southern California's first flying service, although it didn't literally fly. It only took 32 minutes from Ocean and Montana to Hill St in Downtown back then. Expo Line, which will travel on exactly the same railroad right-of-way for the most part but only from 4th/Colorado to 7th/Flower, may take much longer. Although, we should say that the only stop for the Air Line Flyer Service was Palms. In early 20th Century, Santa Monica and Palms were still the only cities on the Westside. AIR LINE FLYER SERVICE PUT ON TO SANTA MONICATrains Will Run to Los Angeles Over Old Southern Pacific Tracks
SANTA MONICA, May 25, 1909.—The following letter has been received by President Goetz of the Santa Monica board of trade: "H. X. Goetz, Santa Monica, Cal.: "Dear Sir—Please be advised that Air Line flyer for the present will leave Ocean and Montana avenues, Santa Monica, at 8:05 a. 18., running to Los Angeles direct over the Air Line, making only the stop at Palms station outside the city limits of Santa Monica. The flyer will return in the afternoon, leaving Hill street station at 5:25 p. m. "After we have tried this a short time we can tell better as to whether the leaving time will be satisfactory. These hours seem to be the most popular ones from the different requests we have received. If we find that these cars are well enough patronized we will endeavor to Increase the service during the day. Yours truly, "R. P. SHERMAN." The service in question, which was inaugurated today, puts this city In communication with Los Angeles by a fourth route, the Los Angeles-Pacific over the old Southern Pacific tracks. The time required by the cars over this line is thirty-two minutes from. North Beach station to Hill street, Los Angeles. Many business men availed themselves of the new train this morning, and it is thought that the servico will be increased by more trains before many days. LOS ANGELES HERALD: WEDNESDAY MORNING, MAY 26, 1909. (provided by Jonathan Weiss)
|
|
|
Post by darrell on Dec 21, 2011 18:58:40 GMT -8
Some historic photos: This photo is of Air Line car #1012 waiting in the Pacific Electric's old 6th and Main downtown depot, probably between 1947 and 1950 (Raymond E. Younghans collection, ERHASC/OERM; photographer not known). C. 1953 — A Pacific Electric Red Car passes what is now Foshay Learning Center on the left. (Ralph Melching collection photo, the Pacific Railroad Museum, Pacific Railroad Society) C. 1953 — A Pacific Electric Red Car crosses the bridge over Ballona Creek, before there was a National Blvd. there. (Ralph Melching collection photo, the Pacific Railroad Museum, Pacific Railroad Society) An eastbound Southern Pacific local freight train crosses the intersection of Venice and Robertson Boulevards in the 1980s.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Dec 21, 2011 22:13:58 GMT -8
Placing the photo of 1012 between 1947 and 1950 is a good guess: The modernized "Blimp" in the background marks it as no earlier than 1947 (more likely 1948) and the 1012 was retired in 1950, being one of the last twelve 1001-class cars to be retired. The only survivor is 1001, which was converted to a rail grinder in the late 1940's. It was retired in 1953 and purchased by PE employee Walter Abbenseth. It is now preserved in running condition at Orange Empire.
|
|
|
Post by joemagruder on Dec 22, 2011 11:51:31 GMT -8
The picture of PE 1299 was most certainly a railfan trip as 1299 was a PE business car. The PE 5116 may have been the daily franchise run.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 19, 2012 16:58:42 GMT -8
There was a discussion of the Palms Depot under Expo Phase 2 construction thread. I will continue it here. The Los Angeles & Independent's Palms Depot. It's unlikely that LA&IRR had a depot. They probably only had a shelter for a stop for passengers. There was the so-called "Grasshopper Station" (due to the flocks of grasshoppers in that location), and it could be a different house or just a shelter. When LA&IRR was built in 1875, Palms (the neighborhood) didn't exist. Palms was founded in in 1886, and it is the oldest neighborhood west of Downtown LA. Southern Pacific had already acquired the line in late 1870s. The existing Southern Pacific Railway Palms Depot was constructed as soon as Palms was founded in 1886. Of course, throughout most of the history, the line was operated by the Southern Pacific subsidiary Pacific Electric Railway. The depot was also remodeled in 1906 and one can only hope that the remodeling wasn't drastic and the existing depot is the same as the 1886 depot. This article discusses the construction of the Palms Depot, with some concrete evidence. One thing for sure is that the existing depot was built in 1886, the year Palms was founded. But not everything is known for earlier years and how it exactly looked before the remodeling in 1906. Palms / Cheviot Hills historian Jonathan Weiss also sent me this article by David Worsfold. Th article says that Palms Depot opened in December 1887. Before Palms Depot opened, LA&IRR apparently had a stop called Bay View Station, apparently at the site of the National Mini Storage near Motor (not the Price Self-Storage further east), which was Palms Lumber Co. until the 1980s. David Worsfold has also this article: Palms now 60 years old(1948)One day before Christmas the community of Palms will be 60 years old, for on December 24, 1886, the subdivision of the town site was recorded in the County Recorder's Office, thus making the first legal establishment of the name Palms. Actually, the district is much older than this, for settlement began 127 years ago with the start of the Spanish Rancho known as La Ballona. This was in 1819 and was the first privately occupied property in the great valley west of the pueblo of Los Angeles. There were small Indian settlements prior to this time. Early population growth was so slow than 17 years Rancho La Ballona and the Newark, adjoining Rancho Rincon de Los Bueyes had attained only 35 inhabitants on two ranches that embraced over 17,000 acres. There was no traffic problem or housing shortage then. The first increase of population came mostly through natural family increase, for the world had not yet discovered the blessings of Southern California. Los Angeles was considered important enough in 1836 for the Mexican government to take the first census. The La Ballona area had 35 residents, all born in Los Angeles, except one, Juan Wilson, an African. The tremendous area of Los Angeles and vicinity had only 2228 inhabitants, including 553 Indians, and no one could have conceived the present day 3,000,000 or more in the same area. Growth of the local area picked up after California was admitted to the union in 1850. A number of Americans entered the area in the next few years and acquired property from the Spaniards and Mexicans. In 1865 La Cienega School District was formed, followed by La Ballona School District in 1866. Rancho La Ballona's 13,920 acres were partitioned by court order among some 23 claimants in 1868. Machado Postoffice, the first west of Los Angeles, was established on December 23, 1874, at what is now Washington Boulevard and Overland Avenue. In 1875, the area got its first railroad through the efforts of John P. Jones, U.S. Senator from Nevada, who built 18 miles of railroad from Los Angeles, west to the ocean, where he founded the town of Santa Monica. Bay View Station was established on the railroad at a point 7 miles east of Santa Monica and was a shipping point for the cattle and grain of La Ballona Rancho. Many families from Iowa, Illinois and other states purchased land in this area and cattle range began to change to small farms. The population increased so that by the time of the 1880 census there were 417 people in the whole valley west of the Los Angeles city limits at Hoover Street. There were 33,000 residents in the entire County. With the completion of the Santa Fe Railway to Los Angeles 1886, the real growth began and during this period C. G. Harrison, Joseph Curtis and E. H. Sweetzer purchased 500 acres of Rancho La Ballona for $80 an acre and subdivided is as "The Palms." E. T. Wright, County Surveyor, laid out the site in November and the plat was recorded on December 24, 1886. Thus on the day before Christmas of 1946, the community will be officially 60 years old. How to the group of local names such as Rancho La Ballona, Machado Postoffice and Bay View Station, the name "Palms" came into being and gradually supplanted the others. The postoffice and railroad station names were changed and a new school district was formed out of La Ballona and called "The Palms." For many years the community was known only as Palms, until in 1913 Harry H. Culver resubdivided the eastern portion of Palms and adjoining farm land and named it Culver City. Considerable effort was made to destroy the name Palms, which it already been established 27 years, and replace it with the new name. Much rivalry and bitterness between the old and the new development helped to bring about the agitation for the annexation of Palms to Los Angeles, and it became a part of the big city on May 22, 1915. The Annex included most of what was then called "Culver City." The remainder of both subdivisions was incorporated on September 20, 1917, as the City of Culver City. The two communities have existed side by side for about 34 years, with much in common but handicapped by being divided instead of united.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 19, 2012 17:11:07 GMT -8
And here is a little photo story of the Palms from George Garrigues's book -- Los Angeles's The Palms Neighborhood:An early picture of the Los Angeles & Independence or Southern Pacific Railroad to Santa Monica, the predecessor of the Expo Line, which ran through Palms:Palms Depot in 1939:This is what stood in place of Price Self-Storage on National Boulevard until about six years ago. It was originally a biscuit factory, then a candy factory, which made the famous Tootsie Roll, also Douglas Aircraft Company publications division for a while, and now, an annoying, out-of-place storage facility where people store their junk for the last six years. It's a sad story of things changing from useful and worthy to useless and worthless:Even the historic 1887 Palm trees had to be cut to build the storage facility. Remind me, whose in charge of land use in Los Angeles?:
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 24, 2012 16:29:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 24, 2012 19:51:52 GMT -8
I liked that last comment in the 1979 article: In this neigborhood (presumably the poor side of town) ".....the kids put pennies on the track. In Beverly Hills, they put down quarters." The freight service was nearing the "end of the line" when my older daughter graduated from USC in 1983, and I noticed an SW-1500 going by the campus.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 24, 2012 21:57:25 GMT -8
I liked that last comment in the 1979 article: In this neigborhood (presumably the poor side of town) ".....the kids put pennies on the track. In Beverly Hills, they put down quarters." The freight service was nearing the "end of the line" when my older daughter graduated from USC in 1983, and I noticed an SW-1500 going by the campus. The freight service to Fisher Lumber at 14th Street and Colorado Avenue in Santa Monica ran until 1987. Freight service to Culver City apparently continued until 1989, the year before Metro purchased the line. There are those in my neighborhood in Palms, near where old Palms Depot was located between Motor Avenue and National/Palms Boulevards, who told me how much they loved the soothing sound of an occasional train horn, which then all of a sudden disappeared in the late 80s. Well, electronic horns will be heard at the Bagley Avenue at-grade crossing as early as two years from now, when the Expo Phase 2 test trains start running.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jan 25, 2012 10:29:41 GMT -8
As many have said before, two forces conspired against the Air Line.
First was cheap and easy crosstown commuting by car. In the really old days (1800s), the train had been a fantastic alternative to the horse. But by the 1940s, cars were readily available, and were considered more convenient than trains. Crosstown traffic wasn't yet as bad it is now, because land use was still relatively light, especially in the Westside.
The other force was a downward spiral in service: few passengers leads to less frequent service, which leads to fewer passengers, etc. In the end (1948) there was only one round trip per day, with 40 passengers. At that point, pulling the plug was simply the logical next step.
It would have taken a very long-term perspective to keep the Air Line running in 1948. But politicians almost never look beyond their own political lives. The Air Line was ended because at the time it didn't make sense to keep it running.
Thankfully we had some activists and policymakers in the 1980s who made sure the right-of-way would be purchased and protected for future use.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jan 25, 2012 10:31:40 GMT -8
As an aside, I've been playing the video game " LA Noire" (PS3, Xbox, PC). It is a fully-immersive experience, allowing you to walk or drive anywhere in a huge swath of Los Angeles as it kinda existed in 1947. A fantastic game for any fan of L.A. history. What's really cool (if a little sad) is to see so many of the old streetcars running throughout Los Angeles. The old terminal buildings are bustling, and the Belmont tunnel is fully operational (and open for exploring). Unfortunately, you cannot ride the streetcars. And as for the Expo Line, the LA Noire city map only extends as far south as 11th Street.
|
|
|
Post by davebowman on Jan 25, 2012 16:39:49 GMT -8
As an Expo Line supporter, I can understand the nostalgia for the old Air Line. I first came out to LA in 1978 to go to USC, and remember the trains running down Exposition between campus and Exposition Park. I also lived in Pasadena in the late 80s-early 90s, when you could hear in the distance the train rumbling through town. But it does irk me that there are still people out there ignorant of the Air Line's history who so readily believe that the death of light rail in LA was due to an unholy conspiracy involving oil companies, GM, etc., rather than the marketplace simply reacting to the fact that people preferred to get around in their own automobiles. Do the conspiracy theorists really believe the Air Line would have been discontinued if it was still profitable, or still provided significant support to real estate speculators? I remember paging through a book on light rail transit in the Santa Monica library, and reading a quote by a transportation analyst that it would have taken a conspiracy to keep the Air Line in business, rather than the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jan 25, 2012 17:48:32 GMT -8
The problem is, history is not as black-and-white as either the conspiracies or the anti-conspiratists suggest.
Were people's attitudes toward movement, transit, getting around changing after World War II? Yes. America was in a post-war economic upswing and people had more money to spend on things like automobiles. People wanted bigger back yards, which they could get by moving out to the suburbs (which the Red Cars had a hand in building in the first place).
Did Los Angeles and other cities fail to transform older streetcar lines into more robust rapid transit lines, which would not have interfered with cars? Yes, absolutely. There were several plans to build rail transit from the 1950s through the 70s which failed for many reasons — fears of "those people" who were just starting to gain political power as the civil rights era got underway; gas, auto and highway political lobbying; fears of transit socialism; federal funds shifting away from transit and into highways; and so on.
Did GM, Standard Oil, Firestone, etc. purchase older, ailing streetcar systems and start replacing them with cheaper, streamlined buses? YES.
Part of the problem is, if you compare the United States with Europe or Japan during the 50s or 60s, it's clear that other nations poured money into trains and transit. The United States, for various reasons, did not. This helped influence people's decisions, which in turn drove the U.S. toward more spending on highways, which influenced people...
You can't divorce political, economic and cultural decisions. None of these things happened in a vacuum, so while the conspiracy theory may not be fully correct, you can't say that GM didn't have an an active role in helping push the Red Cars into the grave.
|
|
|
Post by carter on Jan 25, 2012 19:22:26 GMT -8
I think James offers a really fair assessment. The one additional wrinkle I'll add regarding Europe and Japan's investment compared to the US's lack: rates of car ownership were much higher in the US than in those other two areas, for a number of reasons -- i.e. US figured out how to mass produce, US was wealthier after WW2. And that played a part in undermining the existing transit systems and foregoing further investment.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 25, 2012 21:36:40 GMT -8
I think there was a conspiracy by GM and Good Year but it only played a relatively small role in the disappearance of the streetcar. The main reason was the economics, private ownership of these lines, and the failure of the government to appreciate the importance of the streetcar lines. In hindsight, they would have subsidized and kept all these lines.
It's also important to realize that the disappearance of the streetcar didn't only happen in Los Angeles or United States in general -- it happened almost everywhere around the world, including most places in Europe, and at about the same time. Those few places in Europe and San Francisco here are the lucky places that kept their streetcar lines. It's funny how many visitors often think that San Francisco is a great city and LA is not. They would have had a different impression of LA with respect to San Francisco if Pacific Electric was still here.
Sell Metro to a private company now and I bet all our rail lines and most our bus lines will disappear in a decade. Public transit is never profitable anymore, not even at places where the ridership is extreme. You wouldn't even make money with the NYC subway. You don't really need a conspiracy after all. But then roads are not profitable at all and the government needs to build roads. For the same reason, the government needs to build public transit, even though it's almost impossible to make money out of it.
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jan 26, 2012 16:12:51 GMT -8
It was GM and Firestone, not Goodyear.
While streetcars disappeared from many European and Japanese cities, they were largely replaced other forms of rail transport with exclusive right of way (in another word, an upgrade from streetcars in mixed traffic). We replaced street cars with buses (debatable downgrade in service).
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jan 26, 2012 16:19:50 GMT -8
A few more points:
- Tokyo had streetcars prior to World War II. They started to eliminate those streetcar lines in the 1920s and replaced them with subways. Los Angeles had opportunities to replace streetcars with subways or elevated rapid transit lines, but didn't. As a result, streetcars were stuck in the unfavorable position of "blocking progress," so to speak.
- Japan has had nationalized railways, private railways, privatized railways, and public-private partnerships. It can be hard to tell which is which, and nobody seems to care.
- Lots of Japanese railways are full-on private, but you won't see the names Toyota, Mitsubishi or Honda on those rail lines. (Mitsubishi builds trains like they build everything else; they don't operate trains.) You'll see department store names, which had a vested interest in bringing people from the countryside downtown. Huntington, as a real estate developer, was interested in bringing people out to the suburbs.
We may want to have private help in getting our rail transit system to where we want it to be. This doesn't mean handing Metro over to a private operator or deregulating public transit, but private investment in the system and private development of station real estate couldn't hurt.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 26, 2012 16:48:42 GMT -8
It was GM and Firestone, not Goodyear. While streetcars disappeared from many European and Japanese cities, they were largely replaced other forms of rail transport with exclusive right of way (in another word, an upgrade from streetcars in mixed traffic). We replaced street cars with buses (debatable downgrade in service). Streetcars have been replaced with buses at many places around the world. There was sometimes a transition period in which trolleybuses replaced the trolleys, and then buses replaced the trolleybuses. In Los Angeles, it was more dramatic because most of the streetcar lines were not really streetcars but electric commuter rail or light-rail, running on long sections of secluded right-of-way on ballasted track. Those lines were not really replaced with buses but replaced with freeways. So, in LA, buses and freeways replaced the streetcar and light-rail lines of Pacific Electric Railway. For example, Venice Short Line became a state highway, Expo Line became the Santa Monica Freeway, etc. We already had a good rail system in LA. All they had to do was to upgrade the trains, signaling, and tracks, and add a few grade separations here and there. Instead, they got rid of a very nice existing system. It wasn't just a "streetcar" system like at other places around the world.
|
|
dane
Junior Member
Posts: 59
|
Post by dane on Jan 26, 2012 17:40:28 GMT -8
In Los Angeles, it was more dramatic because most of the streetcar lines were not really streetcars but electric commuter rail or light-rail, running on long sections of secluded right-of-way on ballasted track. Those lines were not really replaced with buses but replaced with freeways. somebody had to link to it...
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 26, 2012 17:54:48 GMT -8
In Los Angeles, it was more dramatic because most of the streetcar lines were not really streetcars but electric commuter rail or light-rail, running on long sections of secluded right-of-way on ballasted track. Those lines were not really replaced with buses but replaced with freeways. somebody had to link to it... Who framed Roger Rabbit is about 1940s LA and filled with Pacific Electric references and the dismantling of the rail system to build the freeway system by a company conveniently named Cloverleaf Industries. I love this line from the movie (which takes place in the 1940s): “Who needs a car in LA? We’ve got the best public transportation system in the world!”
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jan 26, 2012 19:14:52 GMT -8
"Roger Rabbit" is still one of my favorites. It combines classic cartoons, what was excellent special effects for the time, Hollywood segregation and the conspiracy theory of what happened of the Red Cars. Also, the story of neighborhoods being destroyed by freeways. Incidentally, it also kind of muddies the "Red Cars were light rail, not streetcars" waters. Those are (fake) Red Cars on Hollywood streets
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jan 26, 2012 19:32:37 GMT -8
Incidentally, it also kind of muddies the "Red Cars were light rail, not streetcars" waters. Those are (fake) Red Cars on Hollywood streets Well, it was both. The Pacific Electric interurban lines were more of a light-rail or electric-commuter-rail variety, where those huge "blimps" ran across Southern California in excess of 55 MPH. There were also local lines like the Hollywood Line, which used smaller and slower cars that shared tracks with vehicles. Not to mention that there was a separate, narrow-gauge system called Los Angeles Railway (Yellow Cars), which was almost entirely streetcar and perhaps bigger than the Pacific Electric Red Car system, which ran all the local streetcar lines, as well as certain lines as the former Crenshaw Line. Not only that but you can also run modern light-rail systems with LRVs like in the Expo Line in streetcar mode if you want along some segment of a light-rail line. It's done when it's needed. There was nothing "streetcar" or "light-" about this blimp. Count the number of steps and windows and notice how wide it is. It could eat the present-day LRVs currently used on the Expo Line alive.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 26, 2012 22:13:36 GMT -8
PE operated everything from the truly Big Red Cars (of which "blimps" like 418 are a prime example) down to single-truck Birney cars for local streetcar service in places like Redlands and Pasadena. Pasadena was one place where PE really did "sell out" to National City Lines, but NCL only bought the local lines, which PE was probably happy to get rid of. Indeed, in 1923 PE abandoned the weakest Pasadena lines and replaced them with White buses (GM was not in the bus business that early). NCL's biggest deal in the LA area was LA Railway, the narrow-gauge "Yellow Car" system, which until 1945 belonged to the Henry Huntington estate. A retired Huntington manager (who lived near the site of the PE Oak Knoll line) told me that they had adopted an investment policy of divesting "operating properties" such as the railway, and concentrating on "gilt-edged securities", or as he succinctly put it, "If it eats or has to be painted, you don't want your money in it." So when NCL made an offer, the estate was a "motivated seller". Likewise, the owners of the Key System in the Bay Area, were, from what I've heard, quite happy to sell out to NCL in the late 40's. One more aspect of the Pacific Electric, ever since 1912, it had been a subsidiary of Southern Pacific. In the 1940's, there were many people old enough to remember when SP was "The Octopus", which had a finger (or tentacle) in most aspects of California commerce and politics. The idea of using public funds to upgrade SP owned facilities did not sit well with many members of the press and government entities. As you can see, there are many angles to this story. For more information on the cars of both PE and LARY, please see the Orange Empire website at "oerm.org".
|
|
|
Post by joemagruder on Jan 26, 2012 22:56:58 GMT -8
People tend to forget the Los Angeles Railway - the narrow (42" or "Cape") gauge streetcar system in what is now central Los Angeles and close in suburbs - e.g., Eagle Rock, Hawthorne. My understanding is that it carried more passengers than the PE did.
|
|
|
Post by davebowman on Jan 27, 2012 15:52:00 GMT -8
I'm certainly no transit historian, but it makes sense to me that the demand for light rail service would decline as more and more people could afford to own and operate their own automobiles. When I moved out here in the late 70s I couldn't afford a car, and for 2 1/2 years I got around using the bus system and relying on my friends who had cars. But that got to be a drag, and as soon as I could afford a car I got one, and I wouldn't have put it off even if LA had a better light rail/trolley mass transit system. I wasn't brainwashed by GM or Standard Oil; I simply preferred the convenience and privacy of having my own car, and my guess is most people did back in the heyday of the Air Line too. It was the victim of technological, economic, and cultural change, and now that people are realizing over-reliance on the automobile has its costs too (traffic, pollution, fuel costs) the pendulum is swinging back the other way.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Jan 27, 2012 15:59:05 GMT -8
I'm certainly no transit historian, but it makes sense to me that the demand for light rail service would decline as more and more people could afford to own and operate their own automobiles. When I moved out here in the late 70s I couldn't afford a car, and for 2 1/2 years I got around using the bus system and relying on my friends who had cars. But that got to be a drag, and as soon as I could afford a car I got one, and I wouldn't have put it off even if LA had a better light rail/trolley mass transit system. I wasn't brainwashed by GM or Standard Oil; I simply preferred the convenience and privacy of having my own car, and my guess is most people did back in the heyday of the Air Line too. It was the victim of technological, economic, and cultural change, and now that people are realizing over-reliance on the automobile has its costs too (traffic, pollution, fuel costs) the pendulum is swinging back the other way. Yes, the total problem of comparing cars v. transit benefit is convenience. Driving is too darn convenient in Los Angeles compared to other cities. That's a fact. Please name a large world-class city on the size of Los Angeles that has freeways go THROUGH the City? No freeways go THROUGH London, New York, Chicago, San Francisco (101 stops just south), Paris, Moscow, Tokyo, etc.......... That's the difference. In all those aforementioned cities, the freeways/motorways dead end right before you get into the central city area. There is nothing like the US-101 freeway or I-110 that go right through downtown LA. Imagine if our freeways stopped outside downtown LA? Imagine if LA had "ring freeways" like other cities. The ONLY place where freeways have no advantage to transit is in the West LA area between Overland -- LA Brea -- Olympic --Santa Monica blvd. Once you get transit into that huge area.....the freeway is NOT competitive at all. Unlike downtown LA, where you can easily get off the 101, 110 or 10 freeway and you are in downtown LA.
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jan 27, 2012 21:50:29 GMT -8
Regarding the LA Ry system: Henry Huntington retained ownership of the "Yellow Cars" after he sold the PE to Southern Pacific. After he died in 1927, his estate kept it until 1945. The estate management was in the process of divesting "operating properties" and concentrating on "gilt edged securities", or as a retired Huntington manager told me many years ago, the basic policy was, "If it eats or has to be painted, you don't want your money in it." National City Lines made the estate the proverbial "offer they couldn't refuse." What surprised many people was when NCL subsidiary LA Transit Lines bought 40 all-electric PCC streetcars in 1948, despite their reputation as a strictly bus-oriented outfit. These cars were used on the "P" Pico Blvd-East First St. line, a section of which is now served by the Gold Line. Regarding the 42" gauge: Back over a hundred years ago, Los Angeles had cable car lines, and like the still-running cable cars in San Francisco, the track was 42" gauge. When the LA lines were electrified, the streetcar companies didn't bother to standard-gauge many of them and they stay 42" until the last Yellow Cars (by then many of them were green) ran in 1963. There were several miles of dual-gauge track in downtown LA to accommodate both LARy and PE cars, and the streetcar loop at Orange Empire maintains this practice.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jan 28, 2012 12:50:15 GMT -8
Reading this topic makes me realize how many different causes there can be for a historic event.
* Could Huntington himself have been a cause? 1) Perhaps only Collis Huntington's nephew could have had the resources to build such a giant rail transit empire, but then again, he made it necessary... he helped develop suburbs which ultimately led to that spread out, sprawling look L.A. has today. 2) His ties to the Southern Pacific may have ultimately been an albatross for the Pacific Electric. Los Angeles would be a different city today if it had adopted the elevated and subway rapid transit proposals in the 1920s or 1930s (this was the same time period when Tokyo started converting to subway lines). 3) Perhaps, he even monopolized transit too much. NYC had competition in its subway lines, and Tokyo still has lots of different companies (with several track gauges)....
* Regarding Tokyo, freeways and transit: Let's not forget that Japan manufactures millions of automobiles, not all of which get shipped out to foreign shores. There's a lot of cars in Tokyo... Tokyo's expressway/ highway system is nothing like Los Angeles' freeway system, but there are elevated roadways in the downtown area ("downtown" Tokyo is a tricky thing to define, given central Tokyo's overall density). The bigger difference may be that these are all toll roads, not freeways.
|
|