> Why? All the office buildings are in one central place.
No! The defining feature of the LA megapolis is that the offices and workplaces are not all in one central place. Just within LA County, there are major business districts in Hollywood, Santa Monica, Culver City, Burbank, Pasadena, Warner Center, Playa Vista, downtown, Westwood, Century City, … it goes on and on. As Human Transit says, Los Angeles is a "vast constellation of dense places." [1]
This feature actually makes Los Angeles a prime candidate for mass transit. In highly centralized "hub and spoke" metropolises like Chicago, packed trains rush towards the city center all morning, while no one travels the reverse direction. In the afternoon, the situation is flipped. This is an inefficient use of transit infrastructure.
There is significant reverse commute and congestion from Chicago into the suburbs The travel times are typically longer than the conventional flow.
Suburb to Suburb mass transit is bus but challenging for long transits. There are only two major ring type highways. Attempts to get a suburban ring "STAR" train or outer Chicago "Circle" Loop line never get past the study stage.
I'm one such commuter. I go from western Chicago burbs to north. There is no legit public trans option. It's 3 hours one way for what takes me 30 mins in no traffic.
What i really hate is the variability. Good days its 30 min. Bad days, may be over 2 hours. And, you cant always tell before you get on the road.
Yes, actually. Crashes, for example, can't be predicted via Waze and periodically f* up your commute in an epic way. And they happen very quickly and the effects ripple through the system equally quickly.
One other thing. If you get on at 22nd street, headed north on 294, past the Cermack toll (and 290/Roosevelt ramps), you have no exit available for about 8 miles. So, you're committed. And, once you've made it that far, you might as well stick it out, because it'll open up to 80-90 mph as soon as you get past the Touhy toll about 2 miles away.
Yup, happened again this morning for me. Same spot as last week. North bound accident between the Ohare Oasis & the 90/190 exit ramps. 2 lanes blocked. 40 minute estimate from when I left at 8am turned into 70 minutes by the time I arrived at work.
In addition to what drewbug stated: I check traffic before I leave. If I'm lucky, there's a stated 10 minute delay due to a single accident. By the time I get to where the accident was, there's been 3 more. In my 25 mile commute, it's common that I see at least 4 accidents each way. See my other comment, by the time you're on the highway, due to the routes, it's a waste to reroute, mostly due to lack of off ramps.
I disagree that this is what makes LA a prime candidate for mass transit. If you look at NYC, all train lines exist to bring people in and out of manhattan where most people work. In LA you have this massive N+1 problem where you'd need every one of these miniature dense cities to connect to each other miniature dense city by rail.
If that were done, way more people would take public transit, as being able to take a direct route to the place you're going by train would be substancially faster.
No! The defining feature of the LA megapolis is that the offices and workplaces are not all in one central place. Just within LA County, there are major business districts in Hollywood, Santa Monica, Culver City, Burbank, Pasadena, Warner Center, Playa Vista, downtown, Westwood, Century City, … it goes on and on. As Human Transit says, Los Angeles is a "vast constellation of dense places." [1]
This feature actually makes Los Angeles a prime candidate for mass transit. In highly centralized "hub and spoke" metropolises like Chicago, packed trains rush towards the city center all morning, while no one travels the reverse direction. In the afternoon, the situation is flipped. This is an inefficient use of transit infrastructure.
http://humantransit.org/2010/03/los-angeles-the-transit-metr...