LAist: Could NoHo Use a Streetcar?

guest

Mon, 17 Sep 2007 22:25:12 -0800

are you kidding me? a trolley in NOHO. what a waste of money. how about put that money into getting some community police.

guest

Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:47:58 -0800

You know, the cost isn't laying track or buying the cars. It's constructing the stations (and finding room for the platforms on those NoHo streets is going to be a challenge as well). This isn't the 1940s and 1950s, when a streetcar could just run down the middle of the street and people run out into the street to board. Even if that wasn't an unsafe concept in today's world, ADA would mandate platforms for handicapped access. Pipe dreaming is what this is.

Wad

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:06:48 -0800

#8-Most DASH routes already run Monday through Saturday. A few run seven days a week. Most downtown L.A. routes, and a route between Koreatown and Hollywood, only run weekdays. See http://www.ladottransit.com/dash/index.html As for expanding the DASH network, that's on hold after an audit earlier this year found a large operating deficit. The DASH system expanded faster than available funding.

guest

Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:50:58 -0800

In 1994, back when the Red Line was still under construction and the planners were looking at bus service options in and around the two Valley subway stations, there was a North Hollywood circulator proposed. It received virtually no support from commenters during a public hearing in 1995. In 2004, LADOT (the City agency that runs DASH) revived the North Hollywood circulator as part of a city-wide study on unserved transit needs that could be filled by DASH. It ranked dead last, not only in the Valley, but in the entire City of Los Angeles, in terms of potential ridership measured against cost. If a DASH bus can't rank anywhere but last for this need, where do you think you're going to get money for a streetcar? Dream on, Zach.

guest

Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:41:44 -0800

I wish more neighborhoods had all-day (as opposed to peak-hours-only) local circulators -- either shuttle or streetcar. Considering the funding restrictions, all-day DASH service for more neighborhoods would be better. And yes, NoHo has made some serious strides since even last year. My BF and I moved away from NoHo (the "Arts District," ha!) and recently visited. Vineland/Magnolia is looking a lot better these days. Rico A

guest

Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:27:24 -0800

Why a streetcar? 1) They are 100% non-polluting, at the source. Buses are not. Even if you include the electricity generated at the power plant to run the streetcar, they are about 98% cleaner than a diesel bus. 2) Having a route that does not change indicates to developers a long-term investment in a community. Development follows. The Portland Streetcar attracted over $1 billion in new development. 3) L.A. has a history of streetcars, this would go back to that history. 4) Streetcars are easier to access for the disabled (small loading ramps and low floor streetcars can be used) than buses. 5) A short streetcar route, like the one you have proposed, can be constructed for a few million dollars. The trolley cars cost about the same as those Metroliners on the Orange Line (about $600k) and laying the track in the street can be done pretty quickly. The system in Little Rock, about the size of this one, only cost about $10 million. Streetcars are great as circulators in a compact district like NoHo. Over longer routes they are not quite as effective. But in NoHo they would be nice, especially as they connect to the Red Line subway.

guest

Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:04:42 -0800

I totally agree with Alek. Well said! yes, Los Angeles definitely needs some streetcars. And - yes, we do have enough buses and conrete already! Mark L

guest

Mon, 10 Sep 2007 10:26:25 -0800

I think - putting a streetcar is a GREAT idea! To whooever asked "So, why a streetcar?" - I think the answer is simple: because streetcars are MUCH better than buses in all respects! A bus is a bus is a bus. It will never attract new riders as Rail transit does (whether it's a light-rail, streetcar, subway, monorail, etc). Besides, the Streetcars have a number of advantages: their ride is smooth, its service is more reliable (since it runs on a dedicated path), it's entirely pollution-free (since they run on electricity and produce zero emissions). Plus, streetcars help to create a pedestrian-friendly environment; check out other cities around the country (e.g. Portland, San Francisco), and around the world! And you'll see why not a single "attractive" bus will replace streetcars! Finally, electric overhead wiring and the tracks gives a true impression of permanent presence of a transit line, thus attracting more riders. As far as buses & shuttles - we've got PLENTY of those already! And the last thing we need is another bunch of clumsy buses clogging our streets. It's time to change our mentality from LA being a "car only city" with "bus only transit". That's why our city has been so unattractive and pedestrian unfriendly. Buses need to be replaced by Streetcars. So, I definitely think STREETCARS is a way to go! Alek

LA MapNerd

Sun, 09 Sep 2007 19:12:28 -0800

So maybe we just need cooler shuttle buses, then? I mean, everybody loves the NABI 60 BRTs, because they look so Jetsons-swoopy-futuristic, right? Maybe we just need a small jitney/shuttle/transporter to match. Something that runs on fuel cells or batteries or something. Something cool-looking. Maybe we should quit trying to meet 21st-Century transport needs with the cutting-edge technologies of the 1890s. :-) Y'know, get over the whole faux-nostalgic thing and start creating our own cool iconic future history. Or maybe we should just get George Barris to kit out some DASH buses to look like antique trolleys. :-)

Zach Behrens

Sun, 09 Sep 2007 14:27:12 -0800

Because street cars are cool, have character and are iconic. It gets the conversation started. You say bus or shuttle and people look the other way. So you start it off with streetcar, but as you say, there are lots of disadvantages, so a bus is put in place and people still cheer it. But a streetcar would still be more fun:)

LA MapNerd

Sun, 09 Sep 2007 13:58:09 -0800

Yeah, NoHo really needs a local circulator or three, as all the CRA redevelopment stuff comes online. But why a streetcar? If it's going to be running in mixed street traffic just like a shuttle bus, why is a streetcar better than a shuttle bus? What justifies the far higher cost to build it, the much longer time to plan & implement it, the difficulty of re-routing it if (when!) use patterns change, the disruption and congestion of constructing it, the safety issues inherent in mixed rail/auto traffic and high-voltage overhead trolley wires, yadda yadda ya - all the issues that killed off the streetcars years ago? All those issues are still there. So, why a streetcar? What's the advantage of rail in this instance?

Carrie Meathrell

Sun, 09 Sep 2007 09:17:18 -0800

a streetcar *would* be incredibly awesome. I would definitely use it to get around my 'hood, especially for getting down to Universal City (read: Fatburger, In N' Out) and getting up to How's and the metro.